An Atheist who doubts that the Universe had no guidance

Question

First off, let me say that I do not believe in worldly or astral supernatural beings and don't believe in life-after-death, I am a non-scientist that is pro-science. 

But, I find it hard to believe that the universe just happened to contained

1. just the right number/type of quantum fields (that once the universe expanded and cooled) was able to produce working building blocks (atoms) that can attach to each other and conveniently is neutral (normally), but has the components (electrons) to give us electricity and other things.

2. Has gravity that allows things to come together and form planets and most importantly stars that create the heavier particles and some, later exploding, seeding the universe with these other elements.

3. That these atoms can have multiple phases (liquid, gas, solid, plasma, etc.)

4. Force carriers can stack

5. I could also go on and on and name many more (which allows humans to make unlimited things for our convenience).

6. I also don't believe that if you wait 13.8 Billion years and add water, you get a human being from 16? quantum fields .  Even a single cell is an extremely complex entity. Note that no one has created a working proto-cell in the lab yet.  The Miller-Urey simply confirms that chemistry happens (duh!).  Again, I am pro-science.

If the universe simply created a bunch of hair balls that has no properties, I could at least accept that (but would still want to know where they came from ).

The suggested solutions to this paradox do not impress me:

1. multiple universes exist and we just happen to be in the one that had it right, and thus we are here.

2. There is a god (proof?)

3. Sheer luck.

4. We live in a simulation (always a possibility.  If the fidelity is high enough, I don't see how we could tell), but then where did those programmers come from?

Anyone else kept up at night pondering this?

Answer 1

Are you familiar with John Conway's Game of Life? It may be the outstanding example of a simple "physics" in which lifelike structures can arise. It doesn't rule out any other questions or hypotheses, but it does show that the step from "physics" to "biology" is not necessarily so miraculous.