Do all actions have reactions? Every action exhibits traits. Although these traits are visible, they are not always noticed in isolation. Traits of an action eventually constitute the characteristics of the nature of the action. It is an event under certain conditions. Without these conditions an action takes a different form. It can also be the case that it will fail to take effect, in other words the action is impossible. The sense of an action is in effect, independent of the value attached to it. This means that the action has a value a priori. It cannot not be coloured by an external agent. If the observation is coloured it is an automatic distortion having nothing to do with the impact of the action. The impact is the value of the action in itself. Under the same conditions, the action has no other value other than its shared impact. The impact takes the observation back to the nature of the action. When the conditions are changed the same action can become impossible. Impossibility is not just that which is not possible. It also includes the inconceivable.
It can be said that not all actions have the same reaction as their respective natures are different. A tree appears still. It is rooted to a place but it is part of actions. These actions cannot have reactions. When the wind blows against it, there is a rhythmic movement. This makes it look elegant. It does not shake in a clumsy manner. It adds to the gentle breeze as well, giving the atmosphere a delicate touch. It moves with the breeze. It does not get shaken by the breeze. Only when there is a storm it may get uprooted but when it does not get uprooted, it retreats ever so gracefully. There is a difference in condition here. The root cause of the break down could be the roots or the intensity of the storm/wind. If it is the roots, then the nature of the root is to be viewed. If it is the intensity of the storm, then the nature of the storm is the subject matter of focus. Is it the strength of the roots or the ferocity of the storm that has the caused the breakdown? If the roots are strong, the storm can still uproot the tree. This is a matter of threshold. It cannot be said that the roots are week just because the tree could not withstand the storm. What about the storm? The action of the storm has an impact but it does not have a reaction. This is not just a matter of semantics. It is a phenomenon very much in keeping with natural laws.
Take the shadow of the curtains. You do not see the curtains by looking at the motion of its shadow. What you see in the motion of its shadow is a different movie altogether. This movie is figment of the imagination of your mind. It is the intelligence of your body that makes the movie without your awareness. It is a distortion effect in the paradigm in which common knowledge operates but it is a phenomenon in its own right with a dignity unassailable by the closure of the consciously known. This is an unsolicited action and there is no reaction. There may be wonder or surprise but that is no reaction. Unsolicited advice makes no sense and is ignored without any reaction. It welcomes no relevance. Unsolicited action by the intelligence of your body takes you away from what you consciously know. This is welcome, a pleasant revelation of yourself beyond what you know about yourself. This is an action. There can be no reaction. It is impossible in to arrive at a meaningful value of this movie in the plane of knowledge. Even if it is called resemblance from experience, it has no relevance to the plane of physicality and does not alter the equation.
It is impossible to react to a phenomenon of no earthly criticality as much as it is to react to an action of which you are only a part.