Pay attention.
The human mind is NOT a computer. It is best described as a neural network. That itself should make the rest of this post redundant. Sadly….
It is false to say we only use 90% of our brains. It IS sort of correct to say: conscious thought is 10% of our brains. Our whole brain is ALWAYS active and plays a role in all thought, but the conscious mind has the purpose of filtering and refining what comes from whatever you want to call the rest of the brain: "subconscious." (I wholly endorse and accept that there are several layers of "conscious" and "subconscious" brain, but for simplicity and understanding, I hedge).
Not all bodies are equal. Some run faster. Some lift more. Some are more accurate with hands or feet or eyes or ears. Etc.
Not all brains are equal, except for the fact that all brains ADAPT, some more rapidly than others (just as all muscles flex, but some better that others). Of all organs ever known, the only with a primary function observed as adaptation/change is the brain. All other organs have a simple, discrete and static function, whether we have discovered it or not.
The brain is NOT a computer, i.e. it is NOT Deterministic. It is pseudo-probabilistic. It is associative: IE. "what I am experiencing now seems a lot like these things I experience before." That's it! 90% of you brain merely says whether something is similar to what happened before. Your conscious brain takes that and sorts it out as best as possible (be warned, conscious human thought, potency wise, is dwarfed by computational machines.) We have been trained to use LOGIC to constrain the subconscious. Sadly, the human power lacks the computational power to make ALL necessary logical leaps: e.g. thinking 7 moves ahead, rather than 6 move ahead in a game of chess.
Tragically, it does you no good for me to say this: the "subconscious" takes decades to develop, and the entire schema of the subconscious is associative, i.e. recognizing that one thing is like another, IE. this is similar to that. This is why chess players go by patterns, study "strategies," rather than always be "in the moment" of their exact game.
When the subconscious errors, it is "chaotic," which the lucky conscious brain can take and turn into CREATIVE GENIUS: "hey, this seems whacky, but hold on (recursing to subconscious): there really is something to this!" The cause of the error does not matter: too many beans last night, someone convinced you of a false fact two days ago, an painful emotional experience last week, too much or too little sleep, etc. but the key point is that your subconscious sees a previously un-articulated parallel between underwater-basket-weaving and game-theoretic-micro-economics.
If it is something not previously articulated by "EXPERTS" or "AUTHORITIES" or "COMMON WISDOM (an oxymoron: define knowledge vs. wisdom)," it is "horrifying" aberration.
That kind of "error" is the gist of it all. Not only is "creative genius" a statistical anomaly: it is an absolute ABERRATION, by definition. And yet, upon retrospect, almost all of what has been called "genius," can be easily and veritably defined as mere "variation on a theme" already established.
We are not, and cannot be computers or "Turing machines." NEVER. Nor can we be purely creative, just a a computer cannot be "truly random." Biology constrains (though God may liberate).
Do you understand? Variations on a theme? Serendipitous discoveries? Let me add one last thing to your subconscious: why are almost all "creative genius" leaps relatively serendipitous, and why are they almost always achieved by what today we would call "renaissance men/women?"