I have, what I consider, a possible definition of life.
I have been reading about Artificial Life (studying for college) and have hit
upon what I think could be a definition of life (at least on Earth). But I am
neither arrogant enough nor stupid enough to believe that this has not been
thought of before and there are probably good reasons why this is not a good
definition. Please could someone explain to me why the age-old problem of
defining life is not solved by:
"Life (on Earth) consists of all things built by DNA."
Could you copy your replies to this thread by email please.
Thanks and regards,
Matt
