Hi, there has been much media excitement about the launch of the Parker probe and some rather unhelpful attempts at dumbing down the language to the point where it no longer makes sense, or because science correspondence do not even understand the subject before they try to paraphrase PR material. There have been various comments, generally seeming to come from a NASA press release about this mission needing 55 times more energy that a mission Mars. Clearly the energy to escape the potential well of the Earths gravitational field does not depend upon whether you turn left or right at the lights after that. Falling into the potential well created by 98% of the mass in the solar system would not seem to require too much energy on face value. Less in fact than trying to escape further out. It would seem that the idea is the need to kill tangential velocity in order to fall inwards rather than remaining in an earth-like orbit. They already exit Earth orbit "backwards" thus already being at less than orbital speed for this distance. How does this end up needing 55x more energy than climbing the potential gradient to get to Mars ? thanks.