One could argue that there is only the end result. You either did it or you didn't.
If you never
try, you will never
do.
Perhaps the misconception lies in an assumption that you must succeed, i.e. do, on the first try.
Practically all the increase in humanity's knowledge has come from repeated tries that for a long time ended in failure, certainly in the sciences.
Possibly every blind alley needs to be explored, and found to be in error (though our intuition might have told us otherwise - so many solutions have been found to be
counter-intuitive). Analyzing why tries failed can narrow the field of possible explanations.
Sometimes all of these tries fail, and it needs the upheaval of a paradigm shift to break the logjam, like the "classical" one from Ptolemy to Copernicus. It wasn't quite that simple, as Copernicus still dealt in epicycles, that mania for perfect circles with sub-circles and sub-sub ... it took Kepler (aided by the for the time unrivaled accuracy of Tycho Brahe's celestial observations) to consign epicycles to the same dump as Ptolemy. Newton took that further, and his mechanics are still sufficient for the likes of NASA & Co. But not for GPS, that needs
both of Einstein's relativities.
Not sure if the art work of any ilk has gone down the rabbit-hole of the in most part anti-intuitive mathematics involved in science since Newton.