Once you get into those semantics, you actually need to start nailing down what is required to determine that something is 'alive'. For example, does it grow? Tin whiskers grow, but they're not alive.
I remember in my high-school chemistry class, my teacher showed us one seven-point list for defining life, which looked sane to us, then described a two-atom autocatalysing molecule which satisfied it. I can't recall all the points, but it had reproduction satisfied via the autocatalysis. It assembled new versions of itself from component materials just like an animal does through gestating.
I haven't kept a tag on the literature in the area, but I imagine that there's been no great breakthrough in how to unambiguously describe what people mean when they say 'life', let alone 'non-earth life'.
Never mind your definition of life (tho that is important). The fact is, no chemistry but carbon and silicon are complex enough to make anything like dna etc.
I remember in my high-school chemistry class, my teacher showed us one seven-point list for defining life, which looked sane to us, then described a two-atom autocatalysing molecule which satisfied it. I can't recall all the points, but it had reproduction satisfied via the autocatalysis. It assembled new versions of itself from component materials just like an animal does through gestating.
I haven't kept a tag on the literature in the area, but I imagine that there's been no great breakthrough in how to unambiguously describe what people mean when they say 'life', let alone 'non-earth life'.