Pascal states in the first argument that we are incapable of knowing whether God exists or not, so we must believe one way or the other. He says that we are stuck between two infinities. These infinities are the beginning and the end of human life. Therefore we have no proof or true ideas of God because humans were not around the at the same time God was or will be in the end. That is why reason cannot decide which direction we should gravitate nor can reason defend your choice, but a consideration of the possible outcomes supposedly can. He mentions a coin toss with only two possibilities, heads or tails, or in his formula's case God exists or he does not exist. Pascal conceived a formula for assessing whether any belief in God or risk is worth accepting or not. He formulated the following: Measure the benefits of a risk and consider the chances of that benefit coming to be. Then measure the cost of the risk, and consider the chance of it coming to be. If the potential benefit outweighs the cost, the risk is worth taking. He put God into this formula and assigned the existence of God .5 probability and his none existence .5, and this was his conclusion. The reward for the belief in God is infinite, he said. Heaven is forever, so the reward column in our equation is infinity or infinity multiplied by .5 is infinity. The cost of the belief in God, Pascal said, is absolutely nothing, so put a zero in the cost column of the equation. The chance that God does not exist is also .5, so .5 multiplied by the finite value assumed zero is zero. The chances of God not existing may be fifty percent, but again, it doesn't really matter because zero multiplied by any number is still zero. Pascal then concludes that the belief in God is clearly a wise risk worth taking.
             By this point mathematical equation aside, it's believed that we will wager for God. The wager says we should bet on God because the rewards are infinite if th...