I am posting this here since this mainly applies to discussions of theoretical physics...especially in the extreme. I see the term "pop science" used frequently. This is one of those nebulous terms that has the bothersome quality of providing an escape mechanism to avoid unpopular interpretations. I have seen people ranging from Von Daniken to Sagan, from Kaku to Hawking, and from Wheeler to Bohm referred to purveyors of this hypothetical philosophy. Since I don't think the subject exists, I am wondering how you may define this term? My position is that there is good science and bad science. Bad science is a failed attempt at the proper application of the scientific method. Likewise, pop sci is either garbage or not. So do we always mean garbage, or do we mean something else?