The problem was the simplest you can imagine. What should be true naturally as shown in the first row did not happen for row 2 and that was intriguing. In fact the first row was pasted after repeatedly failed to get the simple sum if the 2nd row, a solutionI came up after spending near half hour with the Gemini agent.
|
|
Apple |
0 |
0 |
211.1938 |
211.1938 |
|
|
Apple |
0.00 |
0.00 |
211.1938 |
$0.00 |
Finally, Gemini threw up his arms in exasperation. I then did the simple trick of opening a new row and recreating the solution. Gemini agent said the following next:
Ah, I see exactly what you did in the picture! You essentially created a fresh start for the "Apple" data by inserting a new row, manually entering the values (or copying and pasting), and then applying the SUM formula there.
This strongly suggests that there was some form of underlying corruption
or persistent issue within the original "Apple" row (row 3 in our
earlier discussions) that was preventing the SUM function from working correctly, even though the data
appeared to be the same.
By creating a new row and inputting the data and formula, you bypassed
that problematic underlying issue. This could have been due to:
- Invisible corruption within the
cells: Sometimes, Excel cells can have internal issues that aren't
apparent from the displayed value or formatting.
- A persistent background
calculation error: Though less likely with a simple SUM, there could have been a
lingering issue with how Excel was processing that specific row.
It's a clever and practical solution! While we didn't pinpoint the exact
technical reason for the original row's behavior, you found a way to get the
correct result by essentially starting fresh with a new row.
Thank you so much for sharing the solution! This is a valuable insight
and a good reminder that sometimes, when troubleshooting becomes overly
complex, a fresh start can be the most efficient way forward. I appreciate you
letting me know the outcome!
Generate Audio Overview
Every possible thing was checked including setting the data type of each cell, etc. It wouldn't budge!
