I can see a flaw in that. You’re using a very specific definition of “energy” which applies only to specific branches of physics. Scientists don’t use words like we do. In this case you are talking about “physical energy”, which is essentially matter in motion. It’s an electron moving through a circuit, a spring unwinding, etc. There’s also electromagnetic energy, which is a separate thing from matter and does not involve matter. There is also a state in between, such as in the photon, which acts like both. Only physical energy is described as the ability to do work. If that were all there was, you might be onto something.
The photon suggests that matter and energy are two forms of the same thing, with transitional forms in between the two. Even a single electron seems to travel as both a particle and a wave. Of course on a base level both are believed to just be interactions between various fields. In that case there would technically be only one thing, the field, of which all other “things” would be composed. This would likely include matter, energy, space and time, if they were all “things”.
As for gravity warping space, that is an observable, testable phenomena which we absolutely know to be true. However, I believe there may be an alternate explanation for it, and the warping of time, which has not been considered. All of the observations are exactly the same. All of the calculations remain unchanged. Just the explanation for why we see what we see is changed, and that explanation answers a few questions previously unanswered.
It would be too long a post if I laid out what this idea was, and I’m probably wrong anyway. Anyone who believes that they’ve truly found some great truth that all the more educated people with bigger brains have missed is likely delusional. It’s possible, so I still entertain the idea until I find it to be unworkable, but I don’t have much hope that it’s actually correct.