That's not even a reasonable comment, sorry.
It's already been established that the load from a hot tub is quite high, (I thought the comments about 150 psf were crazy high, and I could have sworn that was from Phameng, but I don't see it above, now.) Anyway, as I posted above, it's in the realm of possible, especially if you apply 100 psf occupancy live load on it, naturally if you add 100 psf to something else you get above 100 psf.... anyway).
But.... doubling it as you suggest puts it way beyond feasible, if you know wood construction.
Designing for 340 - 600 psf is just beyond.
You could perhaps argue the 100 psf from occupant live load is too high, and on the footprint of the hot tub "assembly" live load I admit doesn't make much physical sense, but the code isn't about physical sense, the code is about how it's actually written. The actual mechanics of how that gets negotiated down to a "reasonable" level based on generally accepted principles of mechanics feels very iffy. Sure it's a six person hot tub, I suppose you could tag the thing like an elevator (that would have a life expectancy of three minutes), i.e. max 6 persons or 1,200 lbs, or whatever. (
Big, Healthy, Husky, Fluffy, Dayum and Oh, Heck No).
The primary elements here are the weight of the water, water does NOT get twice as dense, even at the bottom of the Mariana trench (right? now I'm questioning that, maybe Hey Arthur isn't the best resource)
https://water.lsbu.ac.uk/water/water_density.html , or at least, it doesn't get twice as dense under normal atmospheric situations, and the weight of the hot tub itself, pump and equipment (where 20% increase, maybe could be justified). Saltwater is a little denser, but not dramatically, what you're proposing is like filling the hot tub with bricks, not a popular choice, or wet concrete (120-150 pcf?) filled hot tub and those aren't popular.