I have subjected three vases (S1, V2, and V22, Fig. 1) from Matt Beall’s predynastic ancient Egyptian stone vessel collection to a radiological study.

Specifically, I used MCA-PRO hardware, PulseCounter Pro software, and a Canberra 32185 high-purity germanium detector enclosed in a 1.5 ton Canberra 747 lead shield to capture high-resolution gamma spectra of these artifacts. It took me 24-48 hours to capture each spectrum.

I also captured spectra of red granite and basalt rock samples to obtain a baseline for comparison because the S1 vase is made of red granite, and the V2 and the V22 are made of basalt.

Results

The gamma spectrum of the ‘precise’ basalt vase V2 compared to the gamma spectrum of the basalt rock is shown in Fig. 2. A ~2.5x excess in Pb-212 and ~2x excess in Pb-214 peaks is evident, which indicates the increased activity in Th-232 and U-238 decay chains in V2 compared to the basalt sample.

The gamma spectrum of the ‘imprecise’ basalt vase V22 compared to the gamma spectrum of the basalt rock is shown in Fig. 3. The two spectra are virtually identical in terms of activity.

The gamma spectrum of the ‘precise’ red granite vase S1 compared to the gamma spectrum of the Egyptian red granite specimens is shown in Fig. 4. Once again, a ~2.5x excess in Pb-212 is evident, which indicates the increased activity in the Th-232 decay chain in S1 compared to the granite sample.

Preliminary Findings

Because I studied only a very limited sample of vessels, the findings so far must be classified as preliminary. Nevertheless, an intriguing pattern emerges:

1. The ‘precise’ vases S1 and V2 are characterized by ~2.5x stronger Thorium-232 activity compared to the ‘imprecise’ vases.
2. The ‘precise’ vases are characterized by ~2.5x stronger Thorium-232 activity compared to the basalt and red granite samples.
3. The gamma spectrum of the ‘imprecise’ vase V22 is consistent with basalt.

Preliminary Conclusions

1. The preliminary findings are consistent with my nuclear machining hypothesis. That is, if the ‘precise’ artifacts were fashioned using radioisotope machining, I expect them to show elevated activity compared to rocks they were made from. This seems to be the case as I observe ~2.5x higher activity in the Th-232 decay chain in the vessels compared to the rocks.
2. At this point, I cannot distinguish between the nuclear machining hypothesis and other sources of radioactive contamination, such as exposure to the enriched nuclear materials. E.g. the ‘precise’ vessels could have been used as radioactive material storage containers or were parts of some nuclear machinery or reactors.
3. I need to study a larger sample of vessels to firmly establish the elevated activity of ‘precise’ vs. ‘imprecise’ artifacts. Regardless of the nature of the observed radionucleides, these findings would speak volumes about how the two classes of objects are quite different.
4. I cannot think of a trivial way to explain why the higher quality artifacts are also more radioactive compared to the hand-made vessels and natural stone they were made from. If you can think of an explanation, do let me know in the comments.