We all know that the Sun, the Earth, the Moon and the terrestrial waters are in motion.
None is static.
So static is the wrong word to use.
We call what you mean by static theory the equilibrium theory and you are correct it was due to Newton, centuries ago.
You are also correct that it is a very crude inadequate model,
But is does correctly identify the forces involved as a combination of gravitational and rotational and that gravitational forces dominate the force part of the equation, but that rotational speeds dominate the timing part of the equation.
A better theory, which also allows for the fact that the rotational axis of the Moon's orbit is not parallel to the Earth's own rotational axis and a few other effects is known as
The dynamical theory of tides.
But this is still based on Newton's force analysis.
As I have shown your figure of 1600 km/hr is approcimately correct.
But I have also shown that it does not correctly model the system as the timing of the moon's periodic function is not the same as the mechanical resonant frequencies of the water.
Do you understand what this means ?
The simplest method of approaching this is to model the hydrographic response as a fourier series rsonant with the lunar driving force, which introduces the humps you mention and use actual observations to calibrate the fourier coefficients to suit.
A yet better mechanical model is to consider the lunar driving force as a 'Forcing Function' with a frequency near to the resonant to a non resonant system.
Are you familiar with the maths of this ?
It produces frequencies not in the oringinal lunar function nor the resonant response of the hydrographic system.
So to echo swansont's words
Why have you repeated your earlier posting ?
What are you trying to achieve here ?