Have a question regarding the combination of Lightning, Schnorr and CoinJoin…

[Brandsen]

I have been working hard to understand how Lightning works..
With great help from r/bitcoin and Bitcointalk I have put together a Lightning FAQ:

The final result of my work can be found here:
https://medium.com/@AudunGulbrands1/lightning-faq-67bd2b957d70#.8biw0wadf

However, some people have pointed out to me; that it may become expensive to close a Lightning channel, since this will require an on-chain transaction.

I just read the following article in Bitcoin Magazine:
“The Power of Schnorr: The Signature Algorithm to Increase Bitcoin's Scale and Privacy”
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/the-power-of-schnorr-the-signature-algorithm-to-increase-bitcoin-s-scale-and-privacy-1460642496

To summarize;
My understanding of Schnorr and CoinJoin is the following:

Schnorr will allow several signatures to be aggregated into a single, new signature.

Many inputs normally means many signatures, but Schnorr will require only one combined signature to represent all these different signatures.
This means that only one signature must be included in a transaction.

CoinJoin allows different users to combine all their transactions into a single transaction.

Schnorr can enable all participants in a CoinJoin transaction to not only combine their transactions, but to also combine their signatures.


So my question is:

Can Schnorr and CoinJoin be built into Lightning in such a way that several channels can be closed with just one transaction?

So to reduce the cost of closing by having many channels share the cost of just one transaction?

[achow101]

In theory, yes, that would be possible. However you would have to coordinate closing the channels with multiple people at exactly the same time and that can be a bit difficult to do. It would work best where everyone is ok with closing the channel. This would not work too well with creating commitment transactions as that may result in a lot of extra work being done by everybody and one party could end up closing all the channels, which could be problematic.

[Brandsen]

In theory, yes, that would be possible. However you would have to coordinate closing the channels with multiple people at exactly the same time and that can be a bit difficult to do. It would work best where everyone is ok with closing the channel.

Thank you!

I understand this, but one is not always in a hurry..

So for those who are not in a hurry..
Could they maybe put all their “closing transactions” into a common “pool” and have that pool automatically generate a “Schnorr-CoinJoin transaction”  when it reaches a certain size?