This mystifies me every time. My 1990 Telford, Geldart, and Sheriff
says on p. 64, "Magnetic susceptibility in emu differs from that in SI
units by the factor 4pi, that is
	k(SI) = 4pi k'(emu)
Now, since
	M = k H
where M is the magnetization and H is the magnetizing field (both
in the SI unit ampere-meter squared/meter cubed = ampere/meter),
then k must be a unitless constant of proportionality.

On p. 74 Telford gives the average value of k for Basalts in a table
as the number "70", in a column labeled "Susceptibility x 10^3 (SI)".
On p. 73 they say "k ranging from 10^-3 to 1 SI unit as the volume
percentage of Fe3O4 increases from 0.05% to 35%." So I think the real
value for basalt is k = 0.070 (SI), and the column label means they
took the real value and multiplied it by 10^3 to get the number in the
table. So you take the number in the table and DIVIDE by 10^3 to get
the real value (trying to save ink, I guess!).

So if we take the 14,300 in Dobrin and divide by 10^6 we get 0.014 .
This all sounds consistent to me since Telford's range for basalt
is 0.0002 to 0.175 SI.

Values in "cgs" should be the same as in SI, since k is dimensionless.