The human urge to create is as old as existence; we create technology, art, and even life. An entire field known as synthetic biology is dedicated to this quest! Though the name promises the creation of artificial/synthetic life, what does it signify? In 2010, scientists at the J. Craig Venter Institute in Maryland and California claimed they had made the first self-replicating synthetic bacterial cell. But, does that stand for the creation of life, or just an incredible feat of genetic engineering?
The scientists modelled the DNA after a bacterium found in nature. The question is whether we can even make life from basic non-living components. Otherwise, the basic principle becomes akin to grafting a rose from another plant. The result might be what we wish, but the process still does not give us the exact yield.
The main goal would be achieved when we can create self-sustaining cells from just their molecular parts. All cells comprise the same living components: DNA, lipids, proteins, etc. If we were to combine these ingredients, using the principles of chemistry, would it create life?
Even if we combine the ingredients, they don't exactly undergo a magical transformation and turn into cells! There is a specific gestation period, along with the fact that we would essentially be attempting to replicate something that may have a chemical anomaly, in the first place! It is debated whether forming life could be possible if we can manufacture a molecular version of the Big Bang or manufacture similar conditions that would have existed on a primitive Earth, much like with the Adam molecule experiment. Cells can't just form themselves, because in the immortal words of Rudolf Virchow, who helped promote cell theory in the 19th century, “every cell comes from a cell”. So, it brings us back to the eternal question, much like the chicken and the egg: what came first?
The idea that life did occur from a slow combination of certain chemical elements and gases until the qualities of a “living entity” promoted the first cell division means it can be replicated. If we are going so far as to replicate life, why not create something entirely different? Just as some parts of the cell grow and develop independently, we still don't know how to make things that function like molecules, but aren't the same.
In the scientific community, it all boils down to a simple question: What does “life” stand for? And how would we know we have manufactured a living entity if we have no pre-existing standards to compare it to?