If it's not disprovable, then it is not "science," and has no business being treated as such. I'm fine if you want to believe this... it just has no argumentative value.
Secondly, there cannot be "physics divides" and life. The various physical and chemical processes that life depends on also depend on the physical laws we have now. Change them and present life is not possible. Even a miniscule change in the charge of the electron would make life impossible. Changing the speed of light changes the speed of every chemical reaction, every nerve impulse, every energy balance. There's no way to make it work. Life would have to have been different then, and a miraculous change to the new life at the time of the new physics. If you are going to invoke that kind of miracle, then why bother with consistency... just miracle the whole thing.
The problem is, who ever mandated that “science” has to be that way? Secularists did, but that is begging the question of supernaturalism.
There can’t be physics divides and life? It is to laugh at the very assertion. You are going to need a cornucopia of miracle to get where you are under even any kind of evolutionary/abiogenesis theory.
You’ve brought us a good example of begging the question, but you probably learned that from someone else, you probably did not come up with that through original thought.