"So my question is: can someone imagine any other way of how life (including the chain of possible creators) started except by Evolution?"
My answer is: Yes, but that's a muddled question. Evolution isn't relevant to how life started; it can only occur after "life" - that is, self-replication - has started, since evolution really just means a change in allele frequencies over time (evolution is also not a proper noun, and doesn't require special capitalization).
The answer must lie in the field of chemistry, as life in its most basic form of self-replication is a chemical process. The recursion doesn't really seem very mathematically exciting to me: In some way or another, chemicals must have become arranged in such a way that they replicated themselves. Woo hoo. There have been lots of attempts to explain the origins of self-replicators chemically, but no consensus on which is right. I'm no chemist, so I won't try to describe any of them myself.
On a side note, I hope you won't be offended to read that your question is frequently used as an argument against the theory of evolution, despite the fact (stated above) that it's not germane to the subject. Used that way, it's either a shot at evolution that misses its target altogether or it's a shot at science in general, in which case it simply fails to impress.
To seperate 'life' from all other chemical reactions creates a false paradigm. Simple protiens are self replicating but not a form of life and a self replicating chemical formula could very well come together by chance in the nutrient rich atmosphere of a young Earth where frequent radiation from both the sun and isotopes within the rock cause masses of chemical reactions a second. Not to mention the electrical storms that pervade the newly formed atmosphere of young Earth.