The important part is that channel can stay open indefinitely, there's a big penalty to messing with the channel's funds, and also, that funds can be tranferred to other channels (and even other blockchains) without an onchain transaction.
Let's keep things accurate here. What itod said was:
Not only that channels can send funds to each other for the purpose of closing, search for news today where LN channels successfully worked between two different blockchains, BTC and LTC.
...while we were discussing that opening or closing channels consume on-chain transaction capacity. Given the context, it seemed to me that itod was asserting that a channel could be closed by sending funds to another channel, with the implication that the on-chain transaction to close the channel would be eliminated. Did I misinterpret itod's statement? I not, that is what I saw as new information I had not yet heard. If itod was not making such a claim, my proper response is 'so what'. We've all known for ages that Lightning allows transfer of funds through a chain of channels*.
*provided that you know a priori a path from A to B. Unfortunately, last I looked, nobody knows how to do anonymous decentralized route discovery for this purpose.
440000 channels can be opened or closed per day
Unlikely number to be realized, but let's go with that for rhetorical purposes. Once those 440,000 channels get opened or closed (not both), there is exactly zero capacity for any other transactions on the network.
