Channel
@physicsupsc_official
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
1,753subscribers
+29 since we began measuring on 19 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1001616166433 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @physicsupsc_official |
| Created | Between 1 December 2021 and 30 April 2023 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 19 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 17 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 9 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 17 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/physicsupsc_official |
Education — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 17 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 100% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and why it has no browse page of its own yet.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 17 Sept 2026, 00:01 | 1,753 | +3 |
| 12 Sept 2026, 21:37 | 1,750 | -2 |
| 3 Sept 2026, 23:58 | 1,752 | +6 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 00:06 | 1,746 | +11 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 02:45 | 1,735 | +3 |
| 26 Aug 2026, 01:25 | 1,732 | +2 |
| 22 Aug 2026, 17:24 | 1,730 | +6 |
| 19 Aug 2026, 03:45 | 1,724 | no change |
| 19 Aug 2026, 03:15 | 1,724 | first reading |
18 posts held, back to 9 August 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 page of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 18 posts for this entry, the most recent from 14 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
Happy Independence Day We have published 3 variants of PYQ question bank sourced from UPSC CSE + IFoS. They are: 1. UPSC CSE 40 years Question Bank 2. UPSC IFoS 16 years Question Bank 3. UPSC CSE + IFoS Question Bank
Signed ++ ××
UPSC CSE + IFoS Question Bank
Signed ++ ××
UPSC IFoS 16 years Question Bank
Signed ++ ××
UPSC CSE 40 years Question Bank
Signed ++ ××
Based on requests from the community, three editions of the UPSC Physics Optional PYQ Solution Manual (pdf) are planned: 1. Complete Edition (1986–2025) 2,968 CSE + IFoS questions Price: ₹3,000 | Advance: ₹1,000 2. Standard Edition (2000–2025) 2,312 CSE + IFoS questions Price: ₹2,400 | Advance: ₹800 3. Recent PYQ Edition (2010–2025) 1,797 CSE + IFoS questions Price: ₹1,800 | Adv…
Signed ++ ××
And at the same time, the people in jobs and those who want denser form of answer, we have prepared the Rapid Revision Notes (RRN). Same 3 page solution, condensed into a few lines and core equations. Note: RRN will be separate from PYQ solution modules. We are announcing our thought behind these so that these documents earn near universal trust and acceptance. And in case you can suggest something to make it bette…
Signed ++ ××
we are using block equations in typesetting, because it leaves us enough space to scribble and annotate over: 1. iPad 2. Printed copy So it may look that solution is going to 3,4 pages but in real the content is similar to books and just number of pages is more. We did this on purpose by using block equation so that people who are in job can use their iPad well to annotate and practice here itself.
Signed ++ ××
1. Yes, we have treated different questions differently, but we classified questions in following form: purely derivation (we copied it from books via OCR and then augmented it to expand the slightly tougher mathematics), pure numerical (python verification independently), mix (used humans + gpt-5.6 + deepseek v4 + opus based RAG) which uses all the pdf file available and even we tore books to get OCR done correctly)…
Signed ++ ××
Humble Request: 1. Don't use only one type of prompt to get a solution when using any AI model. 2. Add the following to each type of question (theory or numerical): a. Introduction b. Relevant examples/applications c. Inferences d. Conclusion 3. Please keep the question booklet separate from the booklet that has both questions and answers. 4. Please keep the PDF document file print or iPad friendl…
Signed ++ ××
Anytime we feel that OCR is becoming tough for books whose PDF is not available, we simply tore those books, scanned them and then performed OCR to be invested in RAG.
Signed ++ ××
Adding IFoS to the CSE will help both faction well. These days they are asking questions which sits in between the conceptual and numerical.
Signed ++ ××
A good solution should not leave learners dependent on memorising a particular method. It should help them reverse-engineer the reasoning and to understand how an answer is constructed, why a particular approach works, how different ideas connect, and how the same understanding can be applied to an unfamiliar problem. For these reasons, we have specifically went past the boundary to add extra analytical effort to int…
Signed ++ ××
Showing the 12 most recent of 18 posts we hold for @physicsupsc_official. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
This channel appears in 2 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 17 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Abhi Physics | UPSC Physics” (@physicsupsc_official), 1,753 subscribers as measured 17 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/physicsupsc_official.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.