Most here who are experts in various aspects of evolution are using the term [evolution] to refer to the common descent of all living organisms from some few or one living thing of the distant past, and they are defending it as such, pointing out that abiogenesis is a whole different ball-game. But there has been some contention in these forums that ‘Evolution’ necessarily refers to a wider philosophical approach to how all things came about in the cosmos and including the first life. Most of the ink spilled around here is with regard to the evidence for the more “modest” claim of evolution that addresses common descent with modification from pre-existent life-forms. Much less is known or scientifically defended about abiogenesis; i.e. that is more of a ‘frontier territory’ as Dennis Venema speaks of it here in a blog-post that might address some of your questions.
You can find other blogs around that topic or word by putting it into the search box at the home page like I just did. Venema’s article was one of the top hits but there were others. Venema is good and highly recommended around here, but don’t go in expecting that abiogenesis has some sort of widely accepted physical explanation. It’s more into speculative (even if some more informed and other less informed) territory. The only confident assertions around it usually come from those who have a religious or anti-religious ax to grind. Those most “in-the-know” scientifically seem to be speaking with much less confidence about it and despite the excited proclamations of typical headlines over past decades, it probably isn’t “just around the corner” that this puzzle will be solved, if it ever is. I don’t say that as a scientific expert (those who are experts here please correct me as needed) – I say it because there is good reason to be more sober about the typically-optimistic time-lines of excited science enthusiasts.