Talk:TNT equivalent - Knowledge (XXG)

254: 233: 2123:(VEI) index is not appropriate, and the usual measures of a volcano's size (volume of effluent) is only very roughly known for any volcanoes, and has not been scientifically coupled to any energy scale. How can you put an energy tag to a single phenomena that exudes hot magma sometimes invisibly below the surface, blows hot ash into the atmosphere in cubic miles lots, and also may include an earthquake or fifty? Personally, I wish it were true that they could be so succinctly be measured, but I've never seen any geophysicist attempt such a thing. 200: 544: 775:

that context, they almost always are—because even in the U.S. metric tons are the only tons in general use for that purpose. When these numbers are not expressed in metric tons in the United States, they are not expressed in short tons either, but rather in bushels as units of mass, with 1 bushel of wheat or soybeans ≡ 0.0272155422 (metric) ton, 1 bu of corn or rye ≡ 0.02540117272 metric ton, 1 bu of barley ≡ 0.02177243376 metric ton, etc.

528: 878:

the article tries to explain that in one way of measuring that, it is higher than the conventional value, and that in another way of measuring it, it is lower than the conventional value used to define a "ton of TNT equivalent". The problem may be that not everyone will understand what the word "conventional" means in this context, so the transition to measurements made in different ways needs to be made more clear.

413: 191: 474: 463: 616: 576: 2265: 2261: 353: 322: 485: 452: 441: 1462:"4.184 petajoules" What fucking retard put that there? Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with wikipedia? You aren't even allowed to apply a simple conversion factor without needing a citation? Epic fail, wikipedia. Somebody ban me for this so I'm not tempted to waste my time trying to fix this type of bullshit.-- 2126:

Looking through his month-long history of contributions, he has concentrated on adding paragraphs to volcano description pages assigning teratons of TNT equivalent to various volcanos. None of the ones I sampled have any citations at all. I'm going to revert this change for lack of a citation, and,

1384:

If something is sufficient to power the "average household" for 3,104,226 years, and could power the entire United States for 9.5 years, than a quick arithmetic check says that this means there are 326761 households in the USA, and that is assuming no other energy is used outside of these households.

1098:

As this is an article about a subject I have only a passing familiarity with I do not feel qualified to make an edit to the page, nor I am sure how to note that the stated 22kiloton result (and hence the approximately 10% level of error in the figure) is a result of the rounding done and not a result

877:

That says, to me at least (but maybe just because I know that, and the wording may need to be tweaked), that the term "ton of TNT equivalent" always means a gigacalorie, derived from a conventional value of 1000 cal/g times a million grams. It doesn't matter what the actual energy TNT produces. But

774:

One of the problems is that if people are talking about wheat production, for example, they rarely use "megatons". Those mass units usually "million tons" or "million metric tons" or "million tonnes" or "million metric tons" in that context. And even if the tons are not identified as metric tons in

2449:

The "2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami" example is quoted as 9 x 10^6 MT, far greater than 26.3, the value quoted for the 2004Indian Ocean earthquake, yet it also claims to be smaller than the Indian Ocean earthquake. I suspect some of these examples might have numbers that are incorrect by orders

2084:

With regards to disaster in Beirut, the AN was in bags labelled Nitroprill, a knock off version of Orca's Nitropril™ (explosive grade AN / SSAN). If the Nitroprill in Beirut was inferior Fertiliser Grade then it's TNT Equivalency would have been a lot lower, 0.15 to 0.03, but that does not appear to

1380:

1 megaton, when converted to kilowatt-hours, produces enough energy to power the average American household (in the year 2007) for 103,474 Years. For example, the estimated upper limit blast power of the Tunguska event could power the aforementioned home for just over 3,104,226 years. To put that in

1239:

In particular the above says "An explosion energy of 3575 Cal/g was measured by calorimetric methods-in agreement with thermodynamic equilibrium calculations of the “Heat of Combustion” for TNT (based on the CHEETAH code ). Thus, the explosion-induced mixing of the TNT products with oxygen deposited

1234:

Does anyone understand the 651 cal/g number cited in the page? I asked the author of the reference for a citation and an explanation. He replied, but he provided neither. I provided him with the following reference, which puts the TNT energy value (heating value) at 3575 cal/g, and the detonation

764:

Those links should all be cleaned up. Not only to link to a more specific article, but also to specify the units, in the visible text in the articles containing those links, as "tons of TNT" or something of the sort, not just "tons" and "kilotons" and "megatons" as if they were units of mass rather

958:

equation. It's stated that G.I. Taylor arrived at a figure of 22 kilotons for the yield of the Trinity device based on a 140m fireball radius at 0.025 seconds into the explosion. However, when I ran the equation myself today (just an exercise in keeping the mind healthy) my result was closer to the

1969:

Mainly because the numbers get so ridiculously huge near the end that actually speaking, megatons are dwarfed. I wanted some commonality in the table without resorting to conversions; for some, 'ticularly my feller 'Muricans, doing decimal shifting is as bad as tying shoes, if you get my drift.

1399:

Yes, this was my first thought when I read that paragraph. There are definitely more than 325k households in the U.S. If I remember correctly, the number is close to 100,000,000. There are over 300,000,000 total U.S. citizens and I'm fairly certain that the average household size is substantially

2114:

Comes KMTRAGER to add volcanic events to the possibilities for measurement using units of tons of TNT equivalent. While volcanic events are certainly energetic events that this unit could theoretically be applied to, the problem is that, one, volcanoes use a plethora of energy forms to manifest

1149:

This means that all the claims of the form "1 gram TNT = 4184 J (exactly)." in the article are incorrect. They're off by about 10% since that's about the difference between a short ton and a metric ton. When you take this into account, I believe the correct statements are: 1 (short) ton TNT is

1094:

Since I solved the equation myself and have seen that the result matches the official number to within 3% I'm certain that both of the above are false. The official number is likely a truncation of the known yield for ease of public consumption and the approximate 20.6 kiloton figure returned by

817:

Currently a megaton explosive is defined to be exactly 4.184 gigajoules (see opening paragraph). That makes any squabbling over the original ton meant irrelevant; it is now a unit of energy, no longer one of mass. Whether it was originally long, short, metric or simple is not longer meaningful.

784:

Another is that nobody talks about "short megatons" or "long megatons"; megatons (even if not dealing with energy) are almost always metric tons. But a large part of the "ton" article deals with all the various distinctions between long, short, and metric tons not only in the mass units and the

1622:

It is accurate to within an order of magnitude to say that 10J is equivalent to 10 megatons of TNT equivalent. However, it is wrong to say that such an amount of TNT would have a mass a mere 1⅔ the mass of the earth. 10 megatons is 10 kilograms. The earth has a mass of 5.9735*10 kilograms.

2073:

Security Sensitive Ammonium Nitrate (SSAN). This factor is from Török & Ozunu (2015) and it is used by the Australian Explosives Inspectorate. That said, the TNT Equivalency of AN is a rough estimate and it varies a lot depending on the type of AN and conditions that led to a detonation

2414:

Ha this isn't a "great wrong" that needs to be righted; almost every article on WP uses kiloton/kilotonne of TNT interchangeably (as does the world, and etc. for the rest of the prefixed versions), so they're essentially in free variation. Insofar as they are, I'm saying use

2146:

The images in the Examples table are nice and all but they make it much more difficult to compare items in the table and add little / nothing to the data being presented. Plus they're all in the linked articles already; I propose the removal of these images for readability.

701:

and not here, since they are often used to speak of mass rather than explosions. I don't claim to have done this perfectly, so please be bold in following up on it. I didn't see any existing controversy over this terms, but if I have created one, I'm willing to discuss.

1507:

I don't think using total conversion of mater to energy as an example is useful. It has nothing to do with TNT equivalent where a chemical reaction takes place, while matter+antimatter would be a change on the nuclear level. Also it's not TNT specific. I'd rather remove it.

535: 332: 1600:

In my opinion, the example given there is exaggerated. Supernovae are atomic explosions where a fraction of the star's mass is annihilated. Of course this mass is far larger than the size of Earth, so an explosion of the same size requires far more TNT. E.M. Balli

1684:

I'm pretty sure the first sentence of this section is based on a misreading of the referenced article. The wide range given refers to other explosives. There are many standard reference works that give the heat of detonation of TNT as approximately 4100 kJ/kg.

1187:

Of course it's relevant. Every topic has a history. It's just helpful to remember the distinction between the original meaning and the current definition. The meter has been redefined quite a few times, but each of those older definitions is still relevant.

1442:

Unless someone cites actual numbers for the 2013 Russian meteor, I think that 500 kiloton claim needs to be removed. I think a 10 ton rock would have to be moving at 600,000 meters per second to get that amount of energy. I've removed the example.

2355:

the amount of energy in a tonne of TNT. No layperson is going to know these details if the article and all other articles keep referring to it as "ton". This issue is even exemplified by the discussions above where even editors are confused (see

956: 2127:

in a week or so and a lack of counter-argument here, start down the list of changes he has done, as it seems few have been challenged. If he has citations for the values he is assigning, he will need to supply them, both here and there.

204: 1766:, the approximate number of nuclear warheads is around 15,000. As in, a half of the amount, mentioned in the article. Further, the destructive capacity is only around 1460 megatons (1.460 gigaton), according to these pages: 1357:

is worth reading. It points out that the kiloton is only a measure of energy, and the relationship between mass and energy is left ambiguous. It might be better to state this rather than take one particular point of view.

1146:, one of the references given in the article. It's pretty clear from context that when that page says in its table that one "ton of TNT (energy equivalent)" is "4.184E+09 joule (J)" it means a short ton, not a metric ton. 1345:

A different point of view is expressed for example in the book "Explosive Shocks in Air" second edition, by Kinney and Graham, where it is stated on page 2 that the standard is 1100 cal/gram based on the "standard ton".

2518: 2523: 153: 1273:

how many miles would a certian amount of tons destroy? is it exponential? i was watching stargate and the mark IX was said to destroy everything within 100 miles, so how many mega/gigatons of tnt is that?

2493: 304: 802:

Although in "The Los Alomos Primer - The first lectures on how to build an atomic bomb", original declassified document uses short tons, and Serber even explicitly says it's 907kilograms. Which is it?

755:

to see what it said.) The "ton" article deals primarily with mass, but also many other meanings of the highly ambiguous word. But most of the links to "megaton" were to the TNT equivalent meaning.

751:

For another thing, right or wrong, the "megaton" article dealt primarily with energy equivalent of TNT. (Note that after your moves, we need to go to the history of the redirect at "Tonne of TNT"

551: 336: 1240:

an additional 2482 Cal/g of exothermic energy as a consequence of the turbulent combustion process. In the popular literature, this is known as “after-burning” in TNT explosions (see Dewey )."

1310:

as that could be interpreted to mean everything would be within the fireball, or perhaps interpreted that they meant it would destroy all common brick houses and so on with blast to the radius.

1012: 865:

Not only does the second figure fall outside of the range of the first, but the first figure implies that the value is either inconsistent or poorly measured, whereas the second does not. --

1142:

I'm fairly sure that the ton (that is short ton) is correct and the tonne (metric ton) is incorrect. That is, the definition should be 1e9 cal/short ton as you say. This is backed up by

2483: 1342:

I was surprised to see that this page takes the point of view that the "ton" in kiloton is a "tonne". I do not think this is agreed upon or even, in my experience, very common.

1045: 733:

after that was expanded and also linked to this newly expanded article as a "Main article". While I think that has some good points, there are factors that need to be discussed.

2364:). If the terms are interchangeable, we should be using the one that is the least confusing and most precise, especially seeing as many other WP articles use kilotonne as well. 2498: 1078: 426: 403: 365: 147: 1896: 1892: 1878: 844:

Gene Nygaard: You removed the contradiction tag from the "values" section. I was not confused about the meaning of "convention". Here I have highlighted the problem:

1128:

GNU units uses the short ton rather than the tonne - is this just to allow notation like "kiloton" to come out right, or is it actually based on 1e9 cal/shortton ? --

888: 412: 1864: 2513: 2230:

should be used because "ton" is ambiguous. Actually, it's worse: if we were to assume you were right that the article is written in American English, then in AE,

1527:

Looks like the Joule value for kT and MT are wrong. A gallon of gasoline is equivalent to 130 MJ. The TJ values for the kT yields seem wrong. This is the source,

393: 1854: 1771: 2423:, that only applies to titles, and this article's title is "TNT equivalent" that nobody has a problem with, so it's an irrelevant policy to cite in this case. 2332:

Your first link has the incorrect symbols (kT would mean kiloteslas), but again, it doesn't matter what the "standard American spelling" is. The point is that

79: 2478: 2508: 294: 857:

This definition is a conventional one. Explosives energy is normally calculated using the thermodynamic work energy of detonation, which for TNT has been

1485: 1531:

which puts the Hiroshima yeild at 10^14 Joules. I think numbers here and in the Fatman and Little Boy sections need correcting. Possibly elsewhere.

360: 327: 1169:

is now a unit of energy, no longer one of mass (at least this one is so), so wondering which ton of TNT was originally meant is no longer relevant.

2115:

themselves, and two, these forms are not easily amenable to accurate measurement of energy within an order of magnitude. Earthquakes, through the

270: 85: 2488: 2528: 1775: 1767: 1730:

The largest planned detonation of conventional explosives, now that Trump has dropped a MOAB on Afghanistan, has risen to a sad 10 kilotonnes.

44: 2533: 1779: 1306:, it takes some re-reading of sections but the equations will solve your thought experiment, and it really is determined by what you mean by 369: 1623:

Therefore, the mass of the TNT equivalent to a 10J supernova would be about equal to 1 trillion, 10, earths. I edited it to reflect this.

1210:

OK, pardon my obtuseness. You're right, historically it is relevant, though obsolete for purposes of current definition. I stand corrected.

2503: 2451: 1608: 1538: 1401: 1151: 30: 1711:

I don't think we need Wh in the tables. But if we're going to include Wh, we should also include SI units; the Examples section does not.

742:

For one thing, the various moves have left an orphaned talk page without an associated article, which I linked to at the top of this page.

1381:

perspective: the blast energy could power the entire United States for 9.5 years (based on average total energy use in America in 2006).

1665: 1255: 261: 238: 1489: 602: 99: 2419:

and pick the one that is definitively unambiguous rather than the one that will perpetually raise questions and discussions. As for

1874:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

1848: 104: 20: 1865:

http://www.webcitation.org/5x9dgiIL8?url=http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqinthenews/2011/usc0001xgp/neic_c0001xgp_wmt.php

1692: 1014:- which, unless every math teacher I had in school a decade ago are wrong - is correct. I came up with a figure of approximately 253: 232: 74: 2473: 1808:

Well, be assured you have my permission to edit up a storm on this and make it all consistent. Include your refs, of course.

1763: 1330:

As I was on the sidwalk at approx 300 to 500 ft when they bombed the Mariot in Islamabad,I wish to know more about that bomb.

1290: 1133: 672: 2088:

Török, Z., & Ozunu, A. (2015). Hazardous Properties of Ammonium Nitrate and Modeling of Explosions Using TNT Equivalency.

1855:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120128032332/https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2042rank.html

213: 2396: 2312: 2278: 2180: 1797: 168: 1868: 65: 135: 2214:

is spelled the same in American English as it is in British English; it's not a spelling issue. It's a terminology issue (

1639: 1430: 2383: 1939: 1734:

The MOAB is actually 11 tons (0.011 kilotons), which is a few orders of magnitude smaller than the largest detonation.

1954:

Why are megatons used in the examples? I'm not suggesting removing it, but actual kg's of TNT would be useful as well.

1481:

Dynamite, for example, has more than 60% more energy density (approximately 7.5 MJ/kg, compared to 4.6 MJ/kg for TNT).

1047:

Joules, or about 20.6 kilotons. The difference could very likely be that the article speaks in terms of "approximately

2152: 1858: 1422: 1099:

of the equation being inaccurate. And I'm also not sure if such should be done. - An anonymous Knowledge (XXG) user

2120: 1486:

http://www.dynonobel.com/dynonobelcom/en/global/productsandservices/northamerica/Products+%28march2006%29/Dynamite/

965: 109: 2351:

the correct amount of energy released even by a "metric ton" of TNT; it's an arbitrary convention chosen that is

1484:

This is misleading; commercial dynamites have energy yields in the range presented for TNT - follow the links on

1236: 1114: 1895:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

129: 1993: 1959: 1467: 1426: 2455: 2416: 2223: 1612: 1542: 1405: 1155: 219: 1970:

Feel free to add what you think would be useful, but just remember those of us less fortunate than y'all.

1251: 2054: 1930: 1840: 1669: 1493: 1315: 852:

upon explosion. To define the tonne of TNT, this was arbitrarily standardized to 1000 calories = 1 gram TNT.

364:. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a 2420: 2379: 1785: 1688: 1661: 1627: 1604: 1534: 1352: 1278: 1243: 660: 125: 2347:

know that, but what about anyone else? And the ironic thing about in this case is that 4.2 GJ is actually

2148: 2116: 2100: 1696: 1581:

be changed back to a redirect to this page, as it is overwhelmingly used to refer to the unit of energy.

1286: 55: 2039: 1914:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

1902: 1586: 1247: 269:

on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

1839:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 1739: 1635: 70: 1755: 1363: 1017: 175: 1716: 1712: 1110: 635:

on 7 February 2007. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see

1282: 1050: 664: 628: 588: 190: 2428: 2369: 2243: 2132: 2015: 1989: 1975: 1955: 1813: 1463: 1448: 1390: 1215: 1174: 1129: 1083:

I wouldn't be complaining about it, but the way the article is written makes it sound like either:

823: 668: 161: 2404: 2320: 2300: 2286: 2188: 2167: 1759: 1735: 1631: 2392: 2308: 2274: 2176: 2050: 1849:

http://muller.lbl.gov/teaching/Physics10/old%20physics%2010/chapters%20%28old%29/1-Explosions.htm

1793: 1359: 1311: 951:{\displaystyle R=\left({\frac {Et^{2}}{\rho }}\right)^{\begin{matrix}{\frac {1}{5}}\end{matrix}}} 595:

on 31 Mar 2017. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see

1899:

before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template

2234:

means the short ton (2000 lb) by default, which is even more incorrect in this context because

2034:

If the energy of a megagram is 4 gigajoules, shoudln't the energy of a gram be 4 kilojoules? —

1915: 2378:

We follow what the world uses. The world uses kilo/megaton of TNT, so that's what we use. See

2096: 1193: 786: 717: 642: 51: 2400: 2316: 2282: 2184: 2035: 1582: 141: 2297: 1922: 543: 2069:

I changed the TNT Equivalency from 0.42 to 0.32 for explosive grade Ammonium Nitrate (AN)

1488:

Since the quoted sentence isn't particularly relevant it might be simplest to delete it.

1109:

The one that killed off (most) dinos might be added to the list. Values should be around.

861:

from large numbers of air blast experiments and theoretically calculated to be 1160 cal/g.

2119:, can have their energies evaluated, but there is no equivalent scale for volcanos; the 1869:

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqinthenews/2011/usc0001xgp/neic_c0001xgp_wmt.php

2424: 2365: 2239: 2128: 2011: 1988:

I think it should have another one just for KG, and more examples in the lower ranges.

1971: 1881:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by 1832: 1809: 1444: 1386: 1377:

Something seems a little odd about this following paragraph from the examples section:

1211: 1170: 819: 632: 592: 24: 2302:, etc... If short tons were meant, then the energy yield would be 3.8 GJ, not 4.2 GJ. 1921:

If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with

1888: 2467: 2388: 2304: 2270: 2252:

Kiloton, megaton, etc... is the standard American spelling and universally refers to

2201: 2172: 1789: 1513: 1528: 1859:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2042rank.html

1189: 686: 1143: 2340:, which can mean any kind of the 3 common tons; this is an issue of commonality. 2170:. This is written in American English, and the American spelling of ton is ton. 1333: 962:

The equation I used was a transformation of the above equation to solve for E -

866: 703: 527: 1887:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 266: 1237:

http://www.osti.gov/energycitations/servlets/purl/3648-Pc0V6C/native/3648.PDF

2342:

If short tons were meant, then the energy yield would be 3.8 GJ, not 4.2 GJ.

1103: 1349:

A footnote at the bottom of page 13 of "The Effects of Nuclear Weapons" at

885:

It appears that there is an error in the section about Blast Radii and the

656:

Can someone add a history section how TNT come to be used as the standard.

1509: 1087:

The officially stated yield of the Trinity test device is incorrect …or…

1353:

http://www.princeton.edu/sgs/publications/articles/effects/effects-1.pdf

1080:

Joules, which is about 22 kilotons when rounded to the nearest integer.

693:

here, since there was a lot of redundant content. I also re-redirected

2459: 2432: 2409: 2373: 2325: 2291: 2247: 2193: 2156: 2136: 2104: 2058: 2043: 2019: 1997: 1979: 1963: 1944: 1817: 1801: 1743: 1720: 1700: 1673: 1643: 1616: 1590: 1578: 1574: 1570: 1566: 1562: 1546: 1517: 1497: 1471: 1452: 1434: 1409: 1394: 1367: 1319: 1294: 1259: 1219: 1197: 1178: 1159: 1150:

4.184 GJ (exactly) and 1 (metric) tonne TNT is approximately 4.612 GJ.

1137: 1118: 869: 827: 789: 726: 720: 706: 694: 1558: 959:

officially stated yield of 20 kilotons than the 22 kiloton figure.

352: 321: 785:

force units, but sometimes in energy or power units or whatever.

730: 725:

I'd also like to discuss your related moves, such as changing

698: 690: 610: 570: 184: 15: 2519:

Start-Class military science, technology, and theory articles

1385:

I'd suggest one of (or all of) the figures is incorrect... --

2524:

Military science, technology, and theory task force articles

2336:

is valid in all Englishes, and is unambiguous as opposed to

2065:

Updated TNT Equivalency for Explosive Grade Ammonium Nitrate

1235:

energy at 1093 cal/g. The 651 cal/g certainly looks bogus.

542: 526: 411: 2494:

Knowledge (XXG) level-5 vital articles in Physical sciences

2010:

Perhaps you mean kTons?, but by all means. Be my guest.

1843:

for additional information. I made the following changes:

1651:

Explanation on how many dynamites there are of 22 kilotons

2078:

in bags, in bays, free stockpile, fire, falling debris

1165:

Moreso, since the "megaton" is defined as 4.184 Mj, the

1095:

solving the equation is probably the real yield figure.

1836: 752: 637: 623: 597: 583: 1658:

reference to the fat boy nuclear bomb obviously here

930: 160: 1053: 1020: 968: 891: 424:

This article has been checked against the following

265:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2484:

Knowledge (XXG) vital articles in Physical sciences

1891:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors 715:

Part of what I'd put in section below moved up here

536:

Military science, technology, and theory task force

509: 423: 174: 2210:Also, no? Where did you get that idea from?). The 2090:Environmental Engineering & Management Journal 1750:The total global nuclear arsenal numbers are wrong 1072: 1039: 1006: 950: 1529:http://www.evworld.com/library/energy_numbers.pdf 1764:Stockholm International Peace Research Institute 33:for general discussion of the article's subject. 1144:http://physics.nist.gov/Pubs/SP811/appenB8.html 2222:), so the policy you actually want to cite is 1877:This message was posted before February 2018. 697:and a number of similar redirects to point at 1007:{\displaystyle E={\frac {R^{5}\rho }{t^{2}}}} 8: 378:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Military history 2499:C-Class vital articles in Physical sciences 1573:all be merged here, for the same reason as 641:; for the discussion at that location, see 601:; for the discussion at that location, see 1783: 1686: 506: 420: 316: 227: 1831:I have just modified 3 external links on 1302:Use the blast equations in the free book 1064: 1052: 1031: 1019: 996: 982: 975: 967: 933: 929: 913: 903: 890: 1754:According to multiple sources, such as: 358:This article is within the scope of the 1726:The article needs an update after today 318: 229: 188: 2479:Knowledge (XXG) level-5 vital articles 2362:Talk:TNT equivalent § Useful Reference 2341: 2207: 1090:The equation is not actually accurate. 368:. To use this banner, please see the 279:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Explosives 2514:Start-Class military history articles 2361: 2142:Removal of images from Examples Table 1421:based on the statistics given in the 381:Template:WikiProject Military history 7: 2049:Well, yes. Isn't that what it says? 1655:how many dynamites are 22 kilotons? 1577:. I'm also going to recommend that 1523:Energy in Joules may need correction 259:This article is within the scope of 2208:This is written in American English 218:It is of interest to the following 23:for discussing improvements to the 2509:Mid-importance Explosives articles 14: 1835:. Please take a moment to review 1756:Federation of American Scientists 1040:{\displaystyle 8.6\times 10^{13}} 859:accurately measured at 1120 cal/g 50:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome! 2445:contradition between earthquakes 614: 574: 483: 472: 461: 450: 439: 351: 320: 252: 231: 198: 189: 45:Click here to start a new topic. 1847:Corrected formatting/usage for 1073:{\displaystyle 9\times 10^{13}} 398:This article has been rated as 299:This article has been rated as 282:Template:WikiProject Explosives 2489:C-Class level-5 vital articles 2358:Talk:TNT equivalent § What ton 1395:12:31, 30 September 2009 (UTC) 1304:The effects of nuclear weapons 1: 2529:Start-Class weaponry articles 2433:22:44, 18 November 2022 (UTC) 2410:22:31, 18 November 2022 (UTC) 2374:22:28, 18 November 2022 (UTC) 2357: 2137:21:03, 30 November 2020 (UTC) 1701:18:15, 13 February 2016 (UTC) 1674:05:22, 28 February 2013 (UTC) 1518:15:22, 13 December 2010 (UTC) 1472:18:55, 21 November 2009 (UTC) 1453:05:35, 19 February 2013 (UTC) 1260:22:24, 4 September 2008 (UTC) 584:Relative effectiveness factor 273:and see a list of open tasks. 42:Put new text under old text. 2534:Weaponry task force articles 2460:09:29, 5 February 2023 (UTC) 2326:19:03, 5 November 2022 (UTC) 2292:19:00, 5 November 2022 (UTC) 2248:18:15, 5 November 2022 (UTC) 2194:16:25, 5 November 2022 (UTC) 2157:18:06, 17 October 2022 (UTC) 1721:08:05, 17 January 2017 (UTC) 1435:00:44, 22 October 2009 (UTC) 1410:21:14, 21 October 2009 (UTC) 1295:23:14, 25 January 2009 (UTC) 870:17:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC) 790:19:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC) 721:03:50, 8 February 2007 (UTC) 707:17:17, 7 February 2007 (UTC) 361:Military history WikiProject 2504:C-Class Explosives articles 2092:(EEMJ), 14(11), 2671–2678. 2030:Energy of 1g TNT equivalent 1644:16:57, 30 August 2012 (UTC) 1547:04:23, 4 January 2011 (UTC) 1400:smaller than 1,000 people. 1368:21:20, 13 August 2009 (UTC) 2550: 2121:Volcanic Explosivity Index 2105:01:57, 7 August 2020 (UTC) 2020:18:08, 26 March 2018 (UTC) 1998:17:37, 26 March 2018 (UTC) 1980:03:26, 26 March 2018 (UTC) 1964:23:50, 25 March 2018 (UTC) 1908:(last update: 5 June 2024) 1828:Hello fellow Wikipedians, 1818:03:34, 26 March 2018 (UTC) 1744:05:22, 14 April 2017 (UTC) 1160:07:25, 10 April 2013 (UTC) 1119:03:54, 26 March 2008 (UTC) 850:releases 980–1100 calories 444:Referencing and citation: 2238:would mean 2 000 000 lb. 2226:, and that dictates that 2059:09:21, 22 July 2018 (UTC) 2044:09:19, 22 July 2018 (UTC) 1617:17:37, 12 June 2012 (UTC) 1498:19:04, 5 March 2010 (UTC) 1320:12:50, 4 March 2013 (UTC) 1220:22:00, 16 July 2014 (UTC) 1198:23:21, 12 July 2014 (UTC) 1179:08:06, 5 March 2014 (UTC) 1138:17:43, 27 June 2008 (UTC) 828:08:00, 5 March 2014 (UTC) 550: 534: 505: 397: 384:military history articles 346: 298: 247: 226: 80:Be welcoming to newcomers 1945:07:38, 22 May 2017 (UTC) 1760:Arms Control Association 1591:21:19, 2 June 2011 (UTC) 1824:External links modified 1802:11:11, 4 May 2017 (UTC) 510:Associated task forces: 455:Coverage and accuracy: 2474:C-Class vital articles 2117:Moment magnitude scale 1074: 1041: 1008: 952: 547: 531: 488:Supporting materials: 416: 262:WikiProject Explosives 75:avoid personal attacks 2256:tons of TNT. In fact 1680:Historical derivation 1417:I changed it to 3.27 1075: 1042: 1009: 953: 621:The contents of the 581:The contents of the 546: 530: 415: 212:on Knowledge (XXG)'s 205:level-5 vital article 100:Neutral point of view 2382:. We're not here to 1889:regular verification 1167:megatontntequivalent 1051: 1018: 966: 889: 685:Last night I merged 105:No original research 2384:WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS 2166:This is covered by 1879:After February 2018 1427:Suffusion of Yellow 552:Weaponry task force 477:Grammar and style: 430:for B-class status: 285:Explosives articles 1933:InternetArchiveBot 1884:InternetArchiveBot 1423:CIA World Factbook 1308:destroy everything 1070: 1037: 1004: 948: 945: 689:and material from 548: 532: 417: 366:list of open tasks 214:content assessment 86:dispute resolution 47: 2149:Darkskysunflowers 1909: 1804: 1788:comment added by 1703: 1691:comment added by 1664:comment added by 1647: 1630:comment added by 1607:comment added by 1557:I recommend that 1537:comment added by 1298: 1281:comment added by 1269:destruction power 1262: 1246:comment added by 1002: 941: 923: 729:to a redirect to 677: 663:comment added by 649: 648: 609: 608: 569: 568: 565: 564: 561: 560: 557: 556: 501: 500: 490:criterion not met 457:criterion not met 446:criterion not met 402:on the project's 370:full instructions 315: 314: 311: 310: 183: 182: 66:Assume good faith 43: 2541: 2408: 2324: 2290: 2258:kilotonne of TNT 2205: 2192: 1943: 1934: 1907: 1906: 1885: 1676: 1646: 1624: 1619: 1553:Merge Discussion 1549: 1338:Useful Reference 1297: 1275: 1241: 1079: 1077: 1076: 1071: 1069: 1068: 1046: 1044: 1043: 1038: 1036: 1035: 1013: 1011: 1010: 1005: 1003: 1001: 1000: 991: 987: 986: 976: 957: 955: 954: 949: 947: 946: 942: 934: 928: 924: 919: 918: 917: 904: 676: 657: 640: 618: 617: 611: 600: 578: 577: 571: 517: 507: 491: 487: 486: 480: 476: 475: 469: 465: 464: 458: 454: 453: 447: 443: 442: 421: 386: 385: 382: 379: 376: 375:Military history 355: 348: 347: 342: 339: 328:Military history 324: 317: 305:importance scale 287: 286: 283: 280: 277: 256: 249: 248: 243: 235: 228: 211: 202: 201: 194: 193: 185: 179: 178: 164: 95:Article policies 16: 2549: 2548: 2544: 2543: 2542: 2540: 2539: 2538: 2464: 2463: 2447: 2387: 2303: 2269: 2199: 2171: 2164: 2144: 2112: 2110:Volcanic events 2093: 2067: 2032: 1952: 1937: 1932: 1900: 1893:have permission 1883: 1841:this simple FaQ 1826: 1752: 1728: 1709: 1682: 1659: 1653: 1625: 1602: 1598: 1555: 1532: 1525: 1505: 1479: 1477:Dynamite vs TNT 1460: 1458:Citation Needed 1375: 1373:Dubious example 1340: 1328: 1326:The Marot Hotel 1276: 1271: 1232: 1126: 1111:Dysmorodrepanis 1107: 1060: 1049: 1048: 1027: 1016: 1015: 992: 978: 977: 964: 963: 944: 943: 909: 905: 899: 898: 887: 886: 842: 683: 658: 654: 636: 615: 596: 575: 515: 489: 484: 478: 473: 467: 462: 456: 451: 445: 440: 383: 380: 377: 374: 373: 340: 330: 284: 281: 278: 275: 274: 241: 209: 199: 121: 116: 115: 114: 91: 61: 12: 11: 5: 2547: 2545: 2537: 2536: 2531: 2526: 2521: 2516: 2511: 2506: 2501: 2496: 2491: 2486: 2481: 2476: 2466: 2465: 2452:220.240.103.49 2450:of magnitude. 2446: 2443: 2442: 2441: 2440: 2439: 2438: 2437: 2436: 2435: 2417:WP:COMMONSENSE 2330: 2329: 2328: 2224:WP:COMMONALITY 2206:No, it isn't ( 2163: 2160: 2143: 2140: 2111: 2108: 2087: 2066: 2063: 2062: 2061: 2031: 2028: 2027: 2026: 2025: 2024: 2023: 2022: 2003: 2002: 2001: 2000: 1990:Alex of Canada 1983: 1982: 1956:Alex of Canada 1951: 1948: 1927: 1926: 1919: 1872: 1871: 1863:Added archive 1861: 1853:Added archive 1851: 1833:TNT equivalent 1825: 1822: 1821: 1820: 1751: 1748: 1747: 1746: 1727: 1724: 1708: 1705: 1681: 1678: 1652: 1649: 1609:78.172.211.216 1597: 1594: 1554: 1551: 1539:173.11.111.213 1524: 1521: 1504: 1501: 1478: 1475: 1464:Kickflipthecat 1459: 1456: 1440: 1439: 1438: 1437: 1402:170.215.121.70 1374: 1371: 1339: 1336: 1327: 1324: 1323: 1322: 1270: 1267: 1265: 1231: 1228: 1227: 1226: 1225: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1203: 1202: 1201: 1200: 1182: 1181: 1152:50.136.242.240 1125: 1122: 1106: 1101: 1092: 1091: 1088: 1067: 1063: 1059: 1056: 1034: 1030: 1026: 1023: 999: 995: 990: 985: 981: 974: 971: 940: 937: 932: 931: 927: 922: 916: 912: 908: 902: 897: 894: 883: 882: 881: 880: 879: 863: 862: 854: 853: 848:A gram of TNT 841: 838: 837: 836: 835: 834: 833: 832: 831: 830: 808: 807: 806: 805: 804: 803: 795: 794: 793: 792: 779: 778: 777: 776: 769: 768: 767: 766: 759: 758: 757: 756: 746: 745: 744: 743: 737: 736: 735: 734: 723: 682: 679: 653: 650: 647: 646: 633:TNT equivalent 619: 607: 606: 593:TNT equivalent 579: 567: 566: 563: 562: 559: 558: 555: 554: 549: 539: 538: 533: 523: 522: 520: 518: 512: 511: 503: 502: 499: 498: 496: 494: 493: 492: 481: 470: 459: 448: 434: 433: 431: 418: 408: 407: 396: 390: 389: 387: 356: 344: 343: 325: 313: 312: 309: 308: 301:Mid-importance 297: 291: 290: 288: 271:the discussion 257: 245: 244: 242:Mid‑importance 236: 224: 223: 217: 195: 181: 180: 118: 117: 113: 112: 107: 102: 93: 92: 90: 89: 82: 77: 68: 62: 60: 59: 48: 39: 38: 35: 34: 28: 25:TNT equivalent 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2546: 2535: 2532: 2530: 2527: 2525: 2522: 2520: 2517: 2515: 2512: 2510: 2507: 2505: 2502: 2500: 2497: 2495: 2492: 2490: 2487: 2485: 2482: 2480: 2477: 2475: 2472: 2471: 2469: 2462: 2461: 2457: 2453: 2444: 2434: 2430: 2426: 2422: 2421:WP:COMMONNAME 2418: 2413: 2412: 2411: 2406: 2402: 2398: 2394: 2390: 2385: 2381: 2380:WP:COMMONNAME 2377: 2376: 2375: 2371: 2367: 2363: 2359: 2354: 2350: 2346: 2343: 2339: 2335: 2331: 2327: 2322: 2318: 2314: 2310: 2306: 2301: 2298: 2295: 2294: 2293: 2288: 2284: 2280: 2276: 2272: 2267: 2263: 2260:is basically 2259: 2255: 2251: 2250: 2249: 2245: 2241: 2237: 2233: 2229: 2225: 2221: 2217: 2213: 2209: 2203: 2198: 2197: 2196: 2195: 2190: 2186: 2182: 2178: 2174: 2169: 2161: 2159: 2158: 2154: 2150: 2141: 2139: 2138: 2134: 2130: 2124: 2122: 2118: 2109: 2107: 2106: 2102: 2098: 2091: 2086: 2085:be the case. 2082: 2081: 2077: 2072: 2064: 2060: 2056: 2052: 2051:Dondervogel 2 2048: 2047: 2046: 2045: 2041: 2037: 2029: 2021: 2017: 2013: 2009: 2008: 2007: 2006: 2005: 2004: 1999: 1995: 1991: 1987: 1986: 1985: 1984: 1981: 1977: 1973: 1968: 1967: 1966: 1965: 1961: 1957: 1950:Why megatons? 1949: 1947: 1946: 1941: 1936: 1935: 1924: 1920: 1917: 1913: 1912: 1911: 1904: 1898: 1894: 1890: 1886: 1880: 1875: 1870: 1866: 1862: 1860: 1856: 1852: 1850: 1846: 1845: 1844: 1842: 1838: 1834: 1829: 1823: 1819: 1815: 1811: 1807: 1806: 1805: 1803: 1799: 1795: 1791: 1787: 1781: 1777: 1773: 1769: 1765: 1761: 1757: 1749: 1745: 1741: 1737: 1733: 1732: 1731: 1725: 1723: 1722: 1718: 1714: 1706: 1704: 1702: 1698: 1694: 1690: 1679: 1677: 1675: 1671: 1667: 1666:77.53.219.248 1663: 1656: 1650: 1648: 1645: 1641: 1637: 1633: 1629: 1620: 1618: 1614: 1610: 1606: 1596:Earth example 1595: 1593: 1592: 1588: 1584: 1580: 1576: 1572: 1568: 1564: 1560: 1552: 1550: 1548: 1544: 1540: 1536: 1530: 1522: 1520: 1519: 1515: 1511: 1502: 1500: 1499: 1495: 1491: 1487: 1482: 1476: 1474: 1473: 1469: 1465: 1457: 1455: 1454: 1450: 1446: 1436: 1432: 1428: 1424: 1420: 1416: 1415: 1414: 1413: 1412: 1411: 1407: 1403: 1397: 1396: 1392: 1388: 1382: 1378: 1372: 1370: 1369: 1365: 1361: 1355: 1354: 1350: 1347: 1343: 1337: 1335: 1334: 1331: 1325: 1321: 1317: 1313: 1312:Boundarylayer 1309: 1305: 1301: 1300: 1299: 1296: 1292: 1288: 1284: 1280: 1268: 1266: 1263: 1261: 1257: 1253: 1249: 1248:Jqwilliams007 1245: 1238: 1230:Heating value 1229: 1221: 1217: 1213: 1209: 1208: 1207: 1206: 1205: 1204: 1199: 1195: 1191: 1186: 1185: 1184: 1183: 1180: 1176: 1172: 1168: 1164: 1163: 1162: 1161: 1157: 1153: 1147: 1145: 1140: 1139: 1135: 1131: 1123: 1121: 1120: 1116: 1112: 1105: 1102: 1100: 1096: 1089: 1086: 1085: 1084: 1081: 1065: 1061: 1057: 1054: 1032: 1028: 1024: 1021: 997: 993: 988: 983: 979: 972: 969: 960: 938: 935: 925: 920: 914: 910: 906: 900: 895: 892: 876: 875: 874: 873: 872: 871: 868: 860: 856: 855: 851: 847: 846: 845: 840:contradiction 839: 829: 825: 821: 816: 815: 814: 813: 812: 811: 810: 809: 801: 800: 799: 798: 797: 796: 791: 788: 783: 782: 781: 780: 773: 772: 771: 770: 763: 762: 761: 760: 754: 750: 749: 748: 747: 741: 740: 739: 738: 732: 728: 724: 722: 719: 716: 713: 712: 711: 710: 709: 708: 705: 700: 696: 692: 688: 681:Consolidation 680: 678: 674: 670: 666: 662: 651: 644: 643:its talk page 639: 634: 630: 626: 625: 620: 613: 612: 604: 603:its talk page 599: 594: 590: 586: 585: 580: 573: 572: 553: 545: 541: 540: 537: 529: 525: 524: 521: 519: 514: 513: 508: 504: 497: 495: 482: 479:criterion met 471: 468:criterion met 460: 449: 438: 437: 436: 435: 432: 429: 428: 422: 419: 414: 410: 409: 405: 404:quality scale 401: 395: 392: 391: 388: 371: 367: 363: 362: 357: 354: 350: 349: 345: 338: 334: 329: 326: 323: 319: 306: 302: 296: 293: 292: 289: 272: 268: 264: 263: 258: 255: 251: 250: 246: 240: 237: 234: 230: 225: 221: 215: 207: 206: 196: 192: 187: 186: 177: 173: 170: 167: 163: 159: 155: 152: 149: 146: 143: 140: 137: 134: 131: 127: 124: 123:Find sources: 120: 119: 111: 110:Verifiability 108: 106: 103: 101: 98: 97: 96: 87: 83: 81: 78: 76: 72: 69: 67: 64: 63: 57: 53: 52:Learn to edit 49: 46: 41: 40: 37: 36: 32: 26: 22: 18: 17: 2448: 2352: 2348: 2344: 2337: 2333: 2257: 2253: 2235: 2231: 2227: 2219: 2215: 2211: 2165: 2162:Ton vs Tonne 2145: 2125: 2113: 2097:Diamonddavej 2094: 2089: 2083: 2079: 2075: 2070: 2068: 2033: 1953: 1931: 1928: 1903:source check 1882: 1876: 1873: 1830: 1827: 1784:— Preceding 1753: 1729: 1710: 1687:— Preceding 1683: 1660:— Preceding 1657: 1654: 1626:— Preceding 1621: 1603:— Preceding 1599: 1556: 1526: 1506: 1490:74.99.163.15 1483: 1480: 1461: 1441: 1418: 1398: 1383: 1379: 1376: 1356: 1351: 1348: 1344: 1341: 1332: 1329: 1307: 1303: 1272: 1264: 1233: 1166: 1148: 1141: 1127: 1108: 1097: 1093: 1082: 961: 884: 864: 858: 849: 843: 787:Gene Nygaard 765:than energy. 718:Gene Nygaard 714: 687:Tonne of TNT 684: 675:) 5 Nov 2006 655: 624:Tonne of TNT 622: 582: 425: 399: 359: 300: 260: 220:WikiProjects 203: 171: 165: 157: 150: 144: 138: 132: 122: 94: 19:This is the 2036:Nowhere man 1583:Nick Number 1533:—Preceding 1277:—Preceding 1242:—Preceding 659:—Preceding 638:its history 598:its history 466:Structure: 400:Start-class 341:Start‑class 148:free images 31:not a forum 2468:Categories 2264:(same for 2262:unheard of 2216:metric ton 1940:Report bug 1713:Kendall-K1 1693:5.65.32.25 1503:Antimatter 627:page were 587:page were 333:Technology 276:Explosives 267:Explosives 239:Explosives 2425:Getsnoopy 2366:Getsnoopy 2296:See e.g. 2240:Getsnoopy 2168:WP:ENGVAR 2129:SkoreKeep 2012:SkoreKeep 1972:SkoreKeep 1923:this tool 1916:this tool 1810:SkoreKeep 1445:Hmoulding 1387:Nick Moss 1283:Beyblayde 1212:SkoreKeep 1171:SkoreKeep 1130:Random832 1104:Chixculub 820:SkoreKeep 665:SweBrainz 208:is rated 88:if needed 71:Be polite 21:talk page 2389:Headbomb 2353:close to 2305:Headbomb 2271:Headbomb 2266:megatons 2202:Headbomb 2173:Headbomb 1929:Cheers.— 1798:contribs 1790:Jeine091 1786:unsigned 1689:unsigned 1662:unsigned 1640:contribs 1628:unsigned 1605:unsigned 1535:unsigned 1291:contribs 1279:unsigned 1256:contribs 1244:unsigned 1134:contribs 1124:What ton 673:contribs 661:unsigned 652:Why TNT? 427:criteria 337:Weaponry 56:get help 29:This is 27:article. 2236:kiloton 1837:my edit 1736:JulesNP 1632:Zork283 1579:Megaton 1575:Kiloton 1571:Teraton 1567:Petaton 1563:Gigaton 1190:Zyxwv99 727:megaton 695:kiloton 303:on the 210:C-class 154:WP refs 142:scholar 2254:metric 1776:France 1768:Russia 1569:, and 1559:Exaton 1360:Stevur 867:Strait 704:Strait 629:merged 589:merged 216:scale. 126:Google 2334:tonne 2228:tonne 2220:tonne 2212:tonne 1780:China 631:into 591:into 394:Start 197:This 169:JSTOR 130:books 84:Seek 2456:talk 2429:talk 2370:talk 2360:and 2244:talk 2218:vs. 2153:talk 2133:talk 2101:talk 2080:etc. 2076:e.g. 2071:i.e. 2055:talk 2040:talk 2016:talk 1994:talk 1976:talk 1960:talk 1814:talk 1794:talk 1762:and 1740:talk 1717:talk 1697:talk 1670:talk 1636:talk 1613:talk 1587:talk 1543:talk 1514:talk 1494:talk 1468:talk 1449:talk 1431:talk 1425:. -- 1419:days 1406:talk 1391:talk 1364:talk 1316:talk 1287:talk 1252:talk 1216:talk 1194:talk 1175:talk 1156:talk 1115:talk 824:talk 753:here 669:talk 162:FENS 136:news 73:and 2386:. 2349:not 2345:You 2338:ton 2268:). 2232:ton 1897:RfC 1867:to 1857:to 1782:. 1772:USA 1510:Bur 1022:8.6 731:ton 699:ton 691:Ton 295:Mid 176:TWL 2470:: 2458:) 2431:) 2403:· 2399:· 2395:· 2372:) 2319:· 2315:· 2311:· 2299:, 2285:· 2281:· 2277:· 2246:) 2187:· 2183:· 2179:· 2155:) 2135:) 2103:) 2095:-- 2057:) 2042:) 2018:) 1996:) 1978:) 1962:) 1910:. 1905:}} 1901:{{ 1816:) 1800:) 1796:• 1778:, 1774:, 1770:, 1758:, 1742:) 1719:) 1707:Wh 1699:) 1672:) 1642:) 1638:• 1615:) 1589:) 1565:, 1561:, 1545:) 1516:) 1508:-- 1496:) 1470:) 1451:) 1433:) 1408:) 1393:) 1366:) 1318:) 1293:) 1289:• 1258:) 1254:• 1218:) 1196:) 1177:) 1158:) 1136:) 1117:) 1066:13 1062:10 1058:× 1033:13 1029:10 1025:× 989:ρ 921:ρ 826:) 702:-- 671:• 516:/ 335:/ 331:: 156:) 54:; 2454:( 2427:( 2407:} 2405:b 2401:p 2397:c 2393:t 2391:{ 2368:( 2323:} 2321:b 2317:p 2313:c 2309:t 2307:{ 2289:} 2287:b 2283:p 2279:c 2275:t 2273:{ 2242:( 2204:: 2200:@ 2191:} 2189:b 2185:p 2181:c 2177:t 2175:{ 2151:( 2131:( 2099:( 2053:( 2038:( 2014:( 1992:( 1974:( 1958:( 1942:) 1938:( 1925:. 1918:. 1812:( 1792:( 1738:( 1715:( 1695:( 1668:( 1634:( 1611:( 1585:( 1541:( 1512:( 1492:( 1466:( 1447:( 1429:( 1404:( 1389:( 1362:( 1314:( 1285:( 1250:( 1214:( 1192:( 1173:( 1154:( 1132:( 1113:( 1055:9 998:2 994:t 984:5 980:R 973:= 970:E 939:5 936:1 926:) 915:2 911:t 907:E 901:( 896:= 893:R 822:( 667:( 645:. 605:. 406:. 372:. 307:. 222:: 172:· 166:· 158:· 151:· 145:· 139:· 133:· 128:( 58:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.