There is a pervasive belief that creativity and innovation are separate and distinct from the concept of science. That creativity and innovation cannot be scientific. This is completely false.

An event begins to fall into the realms of science when experiments are repeatable and the results reproducible. The myth that creativity occurs out of the blue combines to create the impression that it is impossible to design repeatable experiments that generate reproducible results.

One useful definition for this article is to define creativity as problem identification and idea generation and innovation as idea selection, development and commercialisation.

To make creativity scientific, ask two questions:

a) Can repeatable experiments (processes, structures etc) be designed to increase problem identification? Is an increase of output reproducible?

b) Can repeatable experiments (processes, structures etc) be designed to increase idea generation? Is an increase of output reproducible?

To make innovation scientific, ask three questions:

a) Can repeatable experiments (processes, structures etc) be designed to increase idea selection effectiveness? Is an increase of output reproducible?

b) Can repeatable experiments (processes, structures etc) be designed to increase development output? Is an increase of output reproducible?

c) Can repeatable experiments (processes, structures etc) be designed to increase commercialisation output? Is an increase of output reproducible?

Answering the above:

a) It is not unusual for people to agree that repeatable experiments (processes, structures etc) can be designed to increase problem identification. Results