Purpose vs Probability

All function and progress in the universe seems to apply the concept of trial and error. Using this concept, it seems anything -from random circumstantial fluke occurrences, to intellectual coached and analysed positive or negatively reinforced experiments- can make progression.

With a given scenario of significantly numerous repeated trials, even seemingly random happenstances can develop to a more advanced state. As long as within each random occurrence, there is some possibility of the progressive conditions to occur, -by the logic of probability- on average there just needs to be as many repetitions as the denominator of the probability of the beneficial scenario to occur.

Take the formation of solar systems as an example. The probability of a planet forming in orbit around a star, at the precise conditions in which Earth exists -for potential life to begin, as the progressive advancement-, may be perhaps 1/1 trillion. But assuming 1 trillion is the denominator of the probability of the conditions of an Earth-like planet, there theoretically just needs to be 1 trillion occurrences of solar systems forming, for that 1 potential scenario of advancement to take place.

This could be taken as a potential argument contradicting the reasoning of; the probability of purpose of existence -based on the simple fact that the scenarios have occurred, theoretically implicating that there is purpose, otherwise the scenario would not have occurred. Trial and error might be considered a contradictory argument, since it could be suggested that the advancement and beneficial circumstances for our existence, happened simply based on probability and repeated random circumstances. This seems like a plausible explanation for the specific beneficial circumstances of the Earths delicate conditions, and mmayyybe even evolution allowing development to humanity's current conscious state, as there could have plausibly been enough repeated random scenarios of solar systems forming, as well as life sparking on planets and surviving long enough.

BUT, I dont see how trial and error could explain the original and dominating circumstances, allowing potential progression in the universe. By original circumstances, I’m referring to the laws of physics which reign over, control and permit allowance of all occurrences in the universe from the beginning of time. If you were to consider the probability of trial and error as the explanation for the laws of physics existing in the precise constructs as they do -which is required, from the start of the universe, for all other occurrences (which may reasonably have themselves been trial and error)-, then logically there would need to be significantly numerous repeated scenarios of random occurrences of variations of laws of physics.

The original required dominating circumstances not only includes the laws of physics, but also the massive quantity of elemental material in the universe, necessary to allow for the previously mentioned numerous repeated scenarios of solar systems and life sparking and surviving within the solar systems. Without such an enormous quantity of mass of varying elements, there would have been insufficient repeated random occurrences of solar systems, for probability of trial and error to allow the delicate conditions of Earth to pertain.

To further analyse the required initial circumstances of the universe to allow trial and error to be an effective method of execution, all elements and substances in the universe need to exist as they do. In combination with the laws of physics and the quantity of material, there also needs to be the precise variety of elements and material for the universe to operate as it does, allowing the potential for life to exist.

Considering these 3 (at least) requirements initial to the existence of the universe, for the potential of our existence, it seems unlikely to me that the probability of trial and error is rationalisation for the present scenario of conscious human existence.

Taking the concept of trial and error into theoretical effect, with the beginning state of the universe existing as it does (including the necessary laws of physics, varying elements, and quantity of material), there would need to be as many numerous repeated scenarios of the universe existing, as the denominator of the probability of its initial state. Theoretically, from what we know, the plausible alternate circumstantial states of the universe, would be infinite. Since the alternate possibilities would be the denominator of probability, this would insinuate that the required repeated scenarios of the initial state of the universe would have to also be infinite.

It seems to come down to 2 plausible scenarios of the explanation of our existence in the universe, being either:
-random probability, including infinite universes
-or intentional purpose, including propagation

By my interpretation, analysis, and estimate, I’d say purpose is more probable.