The chemistry that attracted 3 million followers: an interview with the creator of the THOISOI channel about explosions, YouTube, and childlike enthusiasm

For many people, chemistry is still associated with boring formulas, a school blackboard, and incomprehensible terms. But Maksim, the creator of the THOISOI channel, proves otherwise: science can be spectacular, vivid, dangerous, beautiful, and truly human. His videos are watched by millions, and after seeing them, viewers go on to study to become chemists, engineers, and scientists.

He started with simple experiments, an interest dating back to his school days, and a desire to show something that was missing from Russian-language YouTube. Today, his Russian-language channel has about two million subscribers, while the English-language project is approaching one million.

We spoke with the creator of THOISOI about why chemistry is not a frightening science, where the line lies between spectacle and irresponsibility, why teaching at school often kills interest, and why emotions are so important in science.

“At first, it was just a hobby”

How did THOISOI begin? Was it a hobby, a science project, or a desire to present chemistry differently?

More like everything at once. At first, there was a YouTube channel where I uploaded simple experiments: growing crystals, various chemical experiments, and visually exciting things. I simply enjoyed doing it.

I bought a camera because I wanted to film. Then I saw that people were interested and were watching. It all came in waves: sometimes I published something, and sometimes I disappeared.

Around 2010, I realized that Russian-language YouTube had almost no decent scientific content about chemistry. There was some in English, but often without proper explanations: just an experiment, text on the screen—and that was it. I wanted to do better.

I began setting myself the goal of publishing videos regularly, about once every two weeks.

“Chemistry became the main topic because I knew it well”

Why did chemistry in particular become your main topic rather than just one area of popular science?

Because I knew chemistry well. I participated in Olympiads and made it to the national Olympiad; it came easily to me. And I realized that I could not only demonstrate an experiment but also explain what was happening.

At the time, I knew physics less well. Biology is not always as spectacular. Chemistry, however, is very visual: you can mix something together and it ignites, starts smoking, changes color, glows, or explodes.

You can see that. It is engaging.

“The main thing is to explain it so that my mother can understand”

For many people, chemistry is associated with boring school lessons and formulas. How do you make it spectacular without sacrificing scientific accuracy?

Through experiments. And the ability to explain complex things in simple language.

At school, people often try to explain things using technical terms. Sometimes teachers simply do not know how to turn a dry textbook into something interesting. But chemistry is all around us. It just needs to be presented in the right way.

I always try to explain things so that my mother can understand. She is a teacher of Russian literature. If she understands, it means the explanation was successful.

“An explosion for the sake of an explosion is not science”

How do you choose topics for your videos: based on visual impact, scientific value, the rarity of the experiment, or audience interest?

All of it together. I have to find it interesting to film. It has to be visually engaging. There has to be something to explain.

You cannot choose a purely theoretical topic where nothing happens on camera. That would be boring. You have to find a balance between spectacle, substance, scientific explanation, and the ability to film it beautifully.

“Sometimes a single experiment takes two hours to film”

What usually remains behind the scenes?

Fatigue.

In a video, everything looks simple: you mix things together, they ignite, and you explain it. But in reality, simply carrying out the experiment may take 15 minutes. Filming it properly, however, can take two hours.

You have to set up the camera, lighting, angle, and focus. Sometimes you have to repeat the same experiment several times to film it from different angles. After all, I don't have ten cameras like on a film set.

Then there is the voice-over. Stumbles, mistakes, failed takes—all of it is edited out. The viewer sees a polished result, but there is a lot of work behind it.

“I don't touch on dangerous topics—because of both YouTube and common sense”

Have there been any experiments you abandoned because they were too dangerous or viewers might misunderstand them?

Yes. For example, YouTube does not like topics related to explosives, drugs, and anything that falls into a gray area.

Formally, some things can be shown from an educational perspective, but it has to be done very skillfully. And there is still a risk: YouTube's artificial intelligence may misunderstand something, impose restrictions, or disable monetization.

But that is not even the main thing. I personally do not want to work with certain substances. They can be toxic, harmful, and dangerous. I do not want to take unnecessary risks.

“Once, my garage caught fire”

Where is the line between spectacle and irresponsibility?

That boundary definitely exists. And sometimes you come to understand it through your own mistakes.

There was one experiment with heptyl. At the time, I did not know that it could spontaneously ignite in the air. The experiment itself was spectacular: essentially a rocket in a test tube. But the substance spilled, caught fire, and the flames spread to the backdrop — and in the end, the garage burned down.

After incidents like these, you develop a much better sense of the limits.

“People's main mistake is ignoring safety requirements”

What mistakes do people make most often when they try to recreate chemical experiments they have seen online?

Failure to comply with safety requirements.

People work without gloves, safety goggles, or a fume hood. They may inhale something, get a substance on their skin, or suffer burns.

I saw a video of someone taking glow sticks apart. Inside them is an ampoule containing concentrated peroxide. He did everything without protection, got the substance on his hands, his skin turned white, and he suffered a chemical burn. And he did not understand what was happening.

In chemistry, you cannot simply “try it out of curiosity.” You need to understand what you are working with.

“Explaining something complex is often harder than conducting the experiment”

Which is more difficult: conducting an experiment or explaining it in a way that keeps the viewer watching until the end?

More like explaining.

The spectacle works on its own: it exploded, caught fire, and looked beautiful. But the viewer needs to understand why we are doing it and what is happening.

You have to hold people’s attention. You need intrigue, an introduction, and dramatic structure. This is already almost an artistic technique.

For example, when discussing rocket fuel that cannot be extinguished with water, simply showing the fire is not enough. You need to explain where it is used, why water makes the situation worse, and what reaction is taking place.

“Chemistry is not complicated. It is simply often explained poorly.”

Is there a myth about chemistry that you would particularly like to dispel?

Yes. The myth that chemistry is difficult.

Chemistry is easier than many people think. Almost anyone can understand it if it is explained properly. All it takes is simple examples and practical experience.

The problem is that there are too few experiments in schools now. The teacher starts the slides, talks about something, the children watch — and for them, it is just another boring lesson. They do not feel that chemistry is real.

But if you ignite a metal, demonstrate a reaction, let people hear the sound, smell the odor, and see the change—that is a completely different experience. That is when interest arises.

“Popular science can genuinely lead someone to a profession”

Can YouTube and popular science spark interest in becoming a scientist, engineer, or researcher?

Of course. Many subscribers have written to me saying that my videos sparked their interest in chemistry, led them to study at university, become chemists, or choose a scientific field.

The main thing is to spark interest. If a person is smart, they will later continue exploring on their own: how it works, why it happens this particular way, and what lies behind it.

It's as if you start the car — and from then on, it drives itself.

“A true expert answers simply”

How can you distinguish a true expert from someone who simply talks about science eloquently and confidently?

You need to ask questions.

If someone is truly an expert, they can answer simply and clearly. If they start getting confused, then perhaps they have simply memorized the text or eloquently retold the material.

It's best to ask something slightly outside the main topic. Then it becomes immediately clear whether the person knows the subject or not.

“I didn't chase subscribers”

Your Russian-language channel currently has about two million subscribers, and your English-language channel almost one million. Was it difficult to reach that point?

I was just doing my thing. I definitely didn’t set out to gain so many subscribers.

I think you should do what you enjoy and try to do it well. If you only chase fame, subscribers, and money, you can burn out quickly. But if you enjoy the process, everything else will follow naturally.

“Shorts and long videos are like two different rooms”

Do you make short videos or mainly long videos?

Mainly long ones.

I’ve tried making short ones. They can perform well, but you get paid almost nothing for them. And even if people subscribe after watching Shorts, they often don’t watch long videos.

It’s like two different rooms. People who like short-form content don’t always move on to long videos. I’m not particularly drawn to the short format either. You have to fit everything into one or one and a half minutes—and sometimes that’s harder than making a long video.

“Science isn’t people in lab coats speaking an alien language”

What main idea would you like viewers to take away after watching your videos?

That science is easier than it seems. And that it is interesting.

It is not just scientists in lab coats speaking in incomprehensible language. Scientists are people too. They have emotions, interest, excitement, and childlike curiosity.

I like seeing that childlike sense of wonder. Even in adults. When someone sees a chemical reaction, liquid nitrogen vapor, a flash, or light — it triggers an emotion in them.

And emotions are what people remember best.

Why THOISOI is important not only for YouTube, but also for science

THOISOI is an example of how popular science can work: it does not simplify science into an empty show, but neither does it turn it into a boring lecture.

The channel’s strength lies in its balance. There is spectacle here, but also explanation. There is risk, but also discussion of safety. There is humor and lightness, while respect for science is maintained.

And perhaps that is precisely why projects like these are especially important right now. They give science back what is often lost in classrooms, dry presentations, and textbooks: a genuine sense of curiosity.

Chemistry is no longer just a collection of formulas. It becomes a story. An experience. A reaction. An emotion.

And sometimes that alone is enough to make someone think for the first time:

“Science is interesting, after all. Maybe it is for me too.”