I'm not sure I understand the "hot blast iron smelting" entry - it sounds like Neilson was trying specifically to do something very much like what he ended up doing, not something unrelated.
I classified it as accidental because he was trying to increase the volume of air in the blast furnace, the raising the temperature was merely a way to do that and was essentially incidental. The effect of the increased temperature was extremely surprising to him.
However, reading about his work a little bit closer, it seems like he discovered the effect of hot blast by way of a deliberate experiment on the effects of heated air specifically on the blast furnace, which makes it less accidental, so I've removed this example.
The moral of the story is that planning and structured R&D funding matters. If 90% of inventions over this time period were intentional (people looking for a solution to that specific problem), it matters a lot.
I'm not sure I understand the "hot blast iron smelting" entry - it sounds like Neilson was trying specifically to do something very much like what he ended up doing, not something unrelated.
I classified it as accidental because he was trying to increase the volume of air in the blast furnace, the raising the temperature was merely a way to do that and was essentially incidental. The effect of the increased temperature was extremely surprising to him.
However, reading about his work a little bit closer, it seems like he discovered the effect of hot blast by way of a deliberate experiment on the effects of heated air specifically on the blast furnace, which makes it less accidental, so I've removed this example.
The moral of the story is that planning and structured R&D funding matters. If 90% of inventions over this time period were intentional (people looking for a solution to that specific problem), it matters a lot.
I wish Matt Ridley work on Innovation could be compared/contrasted with these findings Brian. Might that be possible??