You are standing on one side of the fault and you move 10 ft north. Your pylon is standing on the other side of the fault and it moves 10 ft south. The total

You are standing on one side of the fault and you move 10 ft north. Your pylon is standing on the other side of the fault and it moves 10 ft south. The total relative movement is 20 ft. If the assumption is that all of the relative movement is accommodated at one pylon then the pylon must be able to move 20 ft in a single direction. If the direction of the fault offset is unknown then the pylon must be able to move 20 ft in all directions for a total distance of 40 ft. We appear to be talking past each other here. My response is not an appeal to authority - I'm not saying "it's true because I'm an engineer". I walk you through the entire logical process, so you're free to agree or disagree with any of my arguments. This conversation clearly isn't going anywhere so I will just reiterate my point and leave it at that: an above-grade structure will perform no better than a below-grade structure if the fault deformation occurs at the location where the fault crosses the alignment. This "potentially impossible problem" is a problem for both surface and underground structures and cannot be designed around from the structural side for the magnitude of displacement that can potentially occur in CA and, in the end, it is just a risk that has to be accepted or designed around from the systems standpoint. This is alluded to in your own linked documents and noted by the the statement: "It is also likely that in the event of a severe earthquake, Hyperloop capsules would be remotely commanded to actuate their mechanical emergency braking systems." I guess to answer your question: I'd probably believe me. Have a nice day.