A Workbook for IPC Online
一本关于IPC Online的习题解
Writing this book has been a challenging experience, largely because of my discontent with some of the commercial practices associated with ASDAN. I feel compelled to acknowledge the significant financial burden this organization places on Chinese students, particularly when compared to participants from other countries. These high registration fees are a source of frustration and ethical concern for me, as they raise questions about equity and accessibility.
This book, specifically tailored to IPC Online, serves primarily as a prerequisite for BPhO — a requirement that, in my view, lacks substantial standalone value. While the competition itself may not resonate with everyone, I hope you can still find joy and inspiration in the physics presented here. These concepts are fundamental to your understanding of the subject and are worth exploring, regardless of the broader context.
IPC Online is structured as a prerequisite gate for BPhO entry in China. Since ASDAN provides no official past papers for IPC Online, this workbook uses the multiple-choice questions from the standard IPC competition as preparation material — 14 years' worth, ten questions per year, with solutions throughout.
What Is In the Workbook
The content is deliberately concise. IPC Online is not a demanding competition — the questions are approachable, and a student who works through this material carefully in the two weeks before the exam should be well prepared. The exam is January 31st; there is time.
The difficulty level is moderate. This is not BPhO. If you are also preparing for Physics Bowl, working through this as supplementary practice makes good sense — the question styles overlap.
A Note on ASDAN
Only about 3,000 students in China sit BPhO each year. Requiring IPC Online and other ASDAN competitions as priority entry conditions — with their associated registration fees — is a transparent commercial manoeuvre. It places an additional financial burden on students who simply want to take BPhO, framed as a quality assurance measure. I find this practice difficult to defend.
The implicit message is: pay for our supplementary competitions, or risk losing your BPhO spot. That is not an educational argument.