You can disprove my statement by naming something gravity does other than add a shape to spacetime, if you want. Saying "I think you're probably wrong, but I just can't say why" is not an argument.
I'm not trying to disprove what you are saying, I'm just providing some context. Although, point of fact, I think its a weird framing, since even GR, which you seem to be talking about, casts gravity as reciprocal with matter. As the old saying goes: spacetime tells matter how to move, matter tells spacetime how to bend. If that isn't an interaction, I don't know what is.
But, that aside, the idea that gravity is spacetime is really just the theory of general relativity and that is clearly not the final word on the subject. Other approaches to gravity may admit alternative ontologies.
Again, I'm not trying to prove or disprove anything. Just saying that you are kind of oversimplifying an open scientific question.
I'm not trying to disprove what you are saying, I'm just providing some context. Although, point of fact, I think its a weird framing, since even GR, which you seem to be talking about, casts gravity as reciprocal with matter. As the old saying goes: spacetime tells matter how to move, matter tells spacetime how to bend. If that isn't an interaction, I don't know what is.
But, that aside, the idea that gravity is spacetime is really just the theory of general relativity and that is clearly not the final word on the subject. Other approaches to gravity may admit alternative ontologies.
Again, I'm not trying to prove or disprove anything. Just saying that you are kind of oversimplifying an open scientific question.