Rei writes:
My personal theory is that all basic sets of rules exist in parallel.
This is actually not too crazy of an idea, IMHO. It resembles a personal theory of mine that interprets evolutionary theory in context of the Many Worlds hypothesis. In such a scenario, the laws of nature appear to us as they are for the simple fact that our observational pathways developed along the only set of rules that could produce them. That set of rules is then observed by us and defined as natural law somewhat circularly.
It might have been equally probable that different observational pathways developed along completely different sets of rules, resulting in some sorts of structure entirely alien to our regular selves. Even in those instances it would seem sensible that conscious observers would be able to sort out the regularities in the universe that led to the development of their structure and declare
those natural law.
A scenario like that would also render arguments against abiogenesis rather meaningless since "life" would then be somewhat arbitrarily defined as "that which we happen to observe in this line of development as maintaining borders, consuming, excreting, reproducing, etc..." In parallel developments there may be conscious observers who yet exhibit
none of these "life-signs" since none of the physical mechanisms which define those traits would be necessarily present. The origin of life then becomes merely the point in the past where developing forms of matter and energy finally began to meet our arbitrary defintion of what "life" is, and in retrospect such a probability would be inevitable given a Many-Worlds universe.