I loved the article, but there is subtle problem troubling me over here. How do you build the previously impossible without knowing the real extent to what is

I loved the article, but there is subtle problem troubling me over here. How do you build the previously impossible without knowing the real extent to what is possible, or not possible? It's one thing to see trends, but quite another to take in depth domain specific knowledge across multiple interconnected topics and form a picture out of them. I can sit here and talk about trends in a lot of industries, but questions like sustainability, future growth require that picture. You need to get it. It takes a lot of time to do that and there really is no way to escape it. (It's pretty awesome if you fail though, at least you learn something out of it) However, what happens if you're in a crunch and you're trying to enter an unknown field? You can't assimilate information at a reasonably fast pace, and what you do learn will have a greater probability attached to being inaccurate/flawed. Importantly, you won't have the complete means to detect it. I am asking this because pretty often I find that most of the overlooked problems lie in the intersections of things, and I've realized that it's really important to know how to bridge that gap before jumping in.