For an alternative model, you should look to John Wentworth's Gears of Aging sequence, which broadly comes to the opposite conclusion, that there is something that can at least be reasonably viewed as a mediator, if not a root cause of aging (the main reason here is that most stuff in the body is repaired/returned to equilibrium more quickly than the time-scale of aging, meaning that we can broadly rule out the "thousands of things going independently wrong model".
The best explainer comes from this post "Homeostasis and “Root Causes” in Aging":
For an alternative model, you should look to John Wentworth's Gears of Aging sequence, which broadly comes to the opposite conclusion, that there is something that can at least be reasonably viewed as a mediator, if not a root cause of aging (the main reason here is that most stuff in the body is repaired/returned to equilibrium more quickly than the time-scale of aging, meaning that we can broadly rule out the "thousands of things going independently wrong model".
The best explainer comes from this post "Homeostasis and “Root Causes” in Aging":
https://www.lesswrong.com/s/3hfjaztptwEt2cCve/p/d4DvqS88Q29ZaJAj3
Thanks! Would be interested in understanding what you think John got wrong!
I'm not arguing against John Wentworth here, just presenting a model here.
The tricky part of your model is how it would fit a Gompertz distribution of human aging, rather than the exponential distribution.