[The Spoon]

This theory has very good testability.
If high tides form on that bank where you are standing, it means that the current is moving fast along this bank.
It is easy to check based on a map of the sea currents that are on the Internet.

Approximately the tide chart will look like this:
1 km / h - 1 meter.
2 km / h - 2 meter.
3 km / h - 3 meter.
And so on.
And no philosophy.

The amplitude of the tides also depends on the size of the whirlpools, the amount of water under the whirlpool, the distance from the coast to the whirlpool, and the direction of flow (to the west, east, north, south).

The only way to refute the whirlpool theory of tides is to name the coast where the current is moving fast, but there are no high tides there.

Utter crap. The only thing that statement shows is your lack of understanding of tides.

[Yusup Hizirov (OP)]

All of these theories are easy to test with hydrocollider. Hydrocollider - half-filled vessel with a rotating liquid (bucket, glass, bottle, mixer).
If the liquid rotates in the right, then the bucket around itself (in orbit) must be rotated to the left.

[Yusup Hizirov (OP)]

Vertical movement of ocean waters can be convincingly modeled using simple experience.
For this, a half-filled vessel with rotating liquid (bucket, tumbler, mixer) must be rotated around itself (in orbit).
If the liquid in the bucket rotates to the right, the bucket around itself (in orbit) must be rotated to the left.

[Bored chemist]

"No tides are formed on these coasts where currents do not have a high velocity."
If there's a tide then there's flowing water so there are currents.
And equally obviously, if there are no currents there must be no tide.

That has nothing to do with whirlpools, does it?

[Yusup Hizirov (OP)]

In lakes, seas and oceans currents move in a circle.
Currents and whirlpools are one and the same.
For the western winds, also has the properties of the horoscope.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_Circumpolar_Current

[Bored chemist]

Currents and whirlpools are one and the same.

Nonsense.
Ask a river.

For the western winds, also has the properties of the horoscope.

You need to find out what horoscope means.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Horoscope

[The Spoon]

In lakes, seas and oceans currents move in a circle.
Currents and whirlpools are one and the same.
For the western winds, also has the properties of the horoscope.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_Circumpolar_Current

Why do you persist in posting utter nonsense?

[Bored chemist]

Why has someone set up a vote about this?
Do they think science is some sort of popularity contest?

[Yusup Hizirov (OP)]

Vertical movement of ocean waters can be convincingly modeled using simple experience.
For this, a half-filled vessel with rotating liquid (bucket, tumbler, mixer) must be rotated around itself (in orbit).
If the liquid in the bucket rotates to the right, the bucket around itself (in orbit) must be rotated to the left.

When conducting an experiment with a hydro-calider, you need to follow safety precautions.
If your friends notice you with a rotating bucket, they may be suspicious of witchcraft.
To protect yourself, the experience should be carried out indoors or in a clean field.

[Yusup Hizirov (OP)]

The editorial staff is ready to annul the article if an objective critical review is written.
Scientific journal "NBICS-Science. Technology"
http://www.rusnor.org/pubs/articles/15638.htm

[Yusup Hizirov (OP)]

On the German coast of the North Sea, the height of the tides depends on the speed of the current along the coast.
When the current moves at a speed of 1 km / h, the height of the tides will be one meter.
Approximately the tide table will look like this:
1 km / h - 1 meter.
2 km / h - 2 meter.
3 km / h - 3 meter.
And so on.

In order to disprove the whirlpool theory of tides, it is necessary to disprove this table, which is almost impossible.

Table of the dependence of the height of the tidal wave, on the speed of currents along all coasts of Germany and the world.
1 km / h - 1 meter.
2 km / h - 2 meter.
3 km / h - 3 meter.
And so on.

[Bored chemist]

On the German coast of the North Sea, the height of the tides depends on the speed of the current along the coast.
When the current moves at a speed of 1 km / h, the height of the tides will be one meter.
Approximately the tide table will look like this:
1 km / h - 1 meter.
2 km / h - 2 meter.
3 km / h - 3 meter.
And so on.

In order to disprove the whirlpool theory of tides, it is necessary to disprove this table, which is almost impossible.

Table of the dependence of the height of the tidal wave, on the speed of currents along all coasts of Germany and the world.
1 km / h - 1 meter.
2 km / h - 2 meter.
3 km / h - 3 meter.
And so on.

Nonsense.
There could be other explanations for the relationship.

[Yusup Hizirov (OP)]

On the German coast of the North Sea, the height of the tides depends on the speed of the current along the coast.
When the current moves at a speed of 1 km / h, the height of the tides will be one meter.
Approximately the tide table will look like this:
1 km / h - 1 meter.
2 km / h - 2 meter.
3 km / h - 3 meter.
And so on.

On the German coast of the Baltic Sea, the height of the tides depends on the speed of the current along the coast.
When the current moves at a speed of 0.1 km / h, the height of the tides will be 0.1 meter.
Approximately the tide table will look like this:
0.1 km / h - 0.1 meter.
0.2 km / h - 0.2 meter.
0.3 km / h - 0.3 meter.
And so on.

[The Spoon]

On the German coast of the North Sea, the height of the tides depends on the speed of the current along the coast.
When the current moves at a speed of 1 km / h, the height of the tides will be one meter.
Approximately the tide table will look like this:
1 km / h - 1 meter.
2 km / h - 2 meter.
3 km / h - 3 meter.
And so on.

On the German coast of the Baltic Sea, the height of the tides depends on the speed of the current along the coast.
When the current moves at a speed of 0.1 km / h, the height of the tides will be 0.1 meter.
Approximately the tide table will look like this:
0.1 km / h - 0.1 meter.
0.2 km / h - 0.2 meter.
0.3 km / h - 0.3 meter.
And so on.

Repeating nonsense does not make it true.

[Bored chemist]

On the German coast of the Baltic Sea, the height of the tides depends on the speed of the current along the coast.
When the current moves at a speed of 0.1 km / h, the height of the tides will be 0.1 meter.
Approximately the tide table will look like this:
0.1 km / h - 0.1 meter.
0.2 km / h - 0.2 meter.
0.3 km / h - 0.3 meter.
And so on.

And how did you rule out all the other possible explanations for that relationship?

[Yusup Hizirov (OP)]

It is believed that Jupiter, by tidal force, warmed the mantle of Io’s satellite, but for this, Io should rotate around its own axis, and Io always faces Jupiter with one side.
 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Io_(moon)#Interaction_with_Jupiter's_magnetosphere

[Kryptid]

It is believed that Jupiter, by tidal force, warmed the mantle of Io’s satellite, but for this, Io should rotate around its own axis, and Io always faces Jupiter with one side

Io has an eccentric orbit (as do all orbiting objects). When it comes closer to Jupiter, the gravitational force increases on the satellite and as it moves further away, it decreases. This change in force over time is what creates the tides.

[Yusup Hizirov (OP)]

Io has an eccentric orbit (as do all orbiting objects). When it comes closer to Jupiter, the gravitational force increases on the satellite and as it moves further away, it decreases. This change in force over time is what creates the tides.

The satellite of Jupiter Io, is the most geologically active object in the solar system, and has more than 400 active volcanoes.
It is believed that Io's mantle heats up due to the tidal force that arises due to the eccentricity of the satellite's orbit, as a result of which, Io contracts and stretches like an accordion.

And according to the lunar "tide theory", for the formation of a "tidal effect" Io must rotate around its own axis, and Io always faces one side of Jupiter.
And let's not forget that "tidal force" depends more on the radius of the planet than on the force of gravity.
 
At the same time, the eccentricity of the orbit of the Moon and the Earth is much greater than that of Io.
The eccentricity of the orbit of Io is 0.004.
The eccentricity of the lunar orbit is 0.05.
The eccentricity of the Earth's orbit is 0.2.
Io's orbit is almost circular.
The question arises why on the Moon, the Earth and satellites that move along a hyperbole, similar geological activity does not occur.
https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Эксцентриситет_орбиты
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Io_(moon)#Interaction_with_Jupiter's_magnetosphere

[Bored chemist]

Io has an eccentric orbit (as do all orbiting objects). When it comes closer to Jupiter, the gravitational force increases on the satellite and as it moves further away, it decreases. This change in force over time is what creates the tides.

You argue that Jupiter, tidal force induced by the eccentricity of Io's orbit, kneading heats the mantle of Io's satellite, but the eccentricity of the orbit of the Moon and the Earth is much more, why these phenomena of nature do not occur.
The eccentricity of the orbit of Io is 0.004.
The eccentricity of the moon's orbit is 0.05.
The eccentricity of the Earth's orbit is 0.2.
Io's orbit is almost circular.

For the formation of a "tidal effect" Io must necessarily rotate around its own axis, and Io always faces one side of Jupiter.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_eccentricity

Jupiter is big.

[Kryptid]

And the question arises: why such phenomena of nature do not occur on the Moon and the Earth?

Let’s compare the gravitational forces for those two objects.

The gravitational acceleration at the Earth’s surface is 9.807 m/s². This surface of the Earth is about 6,781 kilometers from the Earth’s center. To calculate the gravitational acceleration at an arbitrary altitude, you would use the equation:

Gravitational acceleration = (9.807 x (6,781)²)/Distance²
Gravitational acceleration = 450,945,091.527/Distance²

If we put in the value for the Moon at its closest approach (perigee), we get:

Perigee gravitational acceleration = 450,945,091.527/362,600²
Perigee gravitational acceleration = 450,945,091.527/131,478,760,000
Perigee gravitational acceleration = 0.00342979422 m/s²

So now we’ll calculate the acceleration the Moon experiences at its greatest distance from Earth (apogee):

Apogee gravitational acceleration = 450,945,091.527/405,400²
Apogee gravitational acceleration = 450,945,091.527/164,349,160,000
Apogee gravitational acceleration = 0.00274382352 m/s²

Now we subtract these two values: 0.00342979422 - 0.00274382352 = 0.0006859707. So the change in gravitational acceleration that the Moon experiences from Earth throughout its orbit is 0.0006859707 m/s²

I’ll now do the same calculations for Io:

Perigee gravitational acceleration = (24.79 x (69,911)²)/423,000²
Perigee gravitational acceleration = 121,162,312,962/178,929,000,000
Perigee gravitational acceleration = 0.67715302137 m/s²

Apogee gravitational acceleration = 121,162,312,962/423,400²
Apogee gravitational acceleration = 121,162,312,962/179,267,560,000
Apogee gravitational acceleration = 0.67587416798 m/s²

Difference: 0.67715302137 - 0.67587416798 = 0.00127885338 m/s²

So despite the fact that Io has a much more circular orbit than the Moon does, it experiences a change in gravitational force throughout its orbit that is 86% stronger than the Moon does. However, that isn't the only factor. The rate of that change is also important. It takes the Moon 27.321661 days to orbit the Earth, whereas Io goes around Jupiter once every 1.769138 days, so the rate of change of gravitational acceleration for each satellite is:

Moon = 0.0006859707 m/s²/27.321661 days = 0.00002510754 m/s² per day
Io = 0.00127885338 m/s²/1.769138 days = 0.00072286807 m/s² per day

So Io experiences a rate of change of gravitational acceleration 28.79 times higher than the Moon.