Hm, i think we have roughly the same picture of evolution, i guess. Probably just seeing it differently. i'm sure you have done your research a bit more thoroughly than me though. lol, by the looks of it anyway.
Although, about the absolute reasons for life occurring in nature, I'm strongly leaning towards these main ideas in shaping my thoughts:
1) The universe is deterministic.
I think Plancks quanta just means we can't be certain, not that the universe is actually uncertain to a degree. Although ironically I'm the least certain of this idea as some things about quantum mechanics aren't completely clear to me, yet.
2) Life is just a product of the laws of entropy. (At least a good way to view it)
So most of the time, this law is used to describe simple happenings like hot/cold water becoming warm when mixed. In the case of 'life', it has favoured a completely opposite direction of complexity (insert understanding of evolution here). The sun's rays is the 'hot water' in a way. I think I have a pdf. paper that explains this if you're interested? (should be attached)
3) Evolution favours the gene, always.
Though i understand you're point that altruism and group selection do occur. but often, thinking in terms of groups leads to people thinking that evolution thinks for it's self. This is why i asked if you had read Dawkin's book.. (dw, there's no anti-creationist rants in there)
So for example, a man might save his 3 kids in full knowledge that he will die in the process. no he's not a 'mutant' defective person (speaking in evolutionary terms ). He does this because all his behaviour is only occurring to increase the population of his gene's, at least that particular gene that caused him to save his 3 kids. There are now a 150% (on average) increase of those gene's in the gene pool that caused him to die saving his kids, and thus, they were successful gene's.
This all being said, i'm sure dawinbots hold a lot of promise, even if it's somehow used in the future for something completely different, like developing bahaviours for the enemy in pc/ps3 games?
At the moment i haven't even attempted creating my own bot, i've used I flammas and others with the algae. i've just started using bots from this site. I'm thinking if i can create different environments (with the shapes) in different areas on the map, maybe different species will develop in each area giving them a 'safe zone' then allowing the 'in between' zone to be fought over. constant fighting between two would then lead to favour on complex bot, as simple behaviour could be exploited (not sure, maybe, if they can remember another bots likely bahaviour. probably) The more complex behaviour, met only with even more complex behaviour? well hopefully!
I found a good way to create an environment is to use lots of tall/thin and wide/short shapes crossing each other. Perhaps they will just learn the environment, even so, that would be a good outcome.
BTW thanx Houshalter for the tips!
It's actually a good case for a god: without occasional (non-Armageddon) disruption, things stagnate. Life on Earth was not more complex than bacteria for a billion years. Along the same vein, this chart makes interesting food for thought.
It would be funny if you did come to this conclusion after all you're work on dawinbots lol