How do "Gravitons" interact with Space ?

... I honestly appreciate your effort to explain the maths involved in a more tangible way.............
.......Once more I thank you for your insights !
Regards>FILIPE DE ALBUQUERQUE

`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.

... Interpretation of such images depends on purpose. Meaning lies in the eye of the observer, and that meaning will be determined by the current scientific paradigm... Heisenberg..."We never see the universe directly, only the results of our interactions with it" (paraphrase)

“Heisenberg, Born, and Jordan assumed the
electrons inside the atom but made no attempt to
describe their actual orbital motions. Instead,
Heisenberg had built his multiplication rule on
equations that, he argued, involved only
quantities that could be observed in the
laboratory – primarily frequencies and
intensities of emitted radiation – and, in his
enthusiasm, he had elevated this approach to a
prescription for the formulation of any cogent
theory.”

Einstein objected to this:

“But you don’t seriously believe,” Einstein
objected, “that none but observable magnitudes
must go into a physical theory?”

Heisenberg defended himself by claiming this was
Einstein’s method to physics theory:

“Heisenberg attempted to raise Einstein’s
formulation of the special theory of relativity
in his defense. Einstein had excluded such
notions as absolute space and time because they
could not be observed, and had used an
operational definition of the simultaneity of two
events.”

“Muttering that a “good trick should not be tried
twice,” Heisenberg’s recollected Einstein called
such empirical reasoning nonsense.”

Einstein then rebutted what he claimed was
nonsense:

“In reality the very opposite happens," he
[Einstein] declared. “It is the theory that
decides what we observe.”

“Heisenberg recalled suddenly remembering
Einstein’s statement just before writing his
uncertainty paper... Operational definitions of
fundamental concepts subject to quantum mechanics
and the uncertainty relations followed. The
theory [quantum mechanics] did indeed decide what
could or could not be observed, or remembered.”

From Heisenberg, Physics and Beyond, Arnold J. Pomerans, trans. (New York: Harper, 1971), p. 63.

Heisenberg: "We cannot observe electron orbits inside the atom...Now, since a good theory must be based on directly observable magnitudes, I thought it more fitting to restrict myself to these, treating them, as it were, as representatives of the electron orbits."

"But you don't seriously believe," Einstein protested, "that none but observable magnitudes must go into a physical theory?"

"Isn't that precisely what you have done with relativity?" I asked in some surprise...

"Possibly I did use this kind of reasoning," Einstein admitted, "but it is nonsense all the same....In reality the very opposite happens. It is the theory which decides what we can observe."

@JPLosman0711,
...the very sense of internal highly dependent on the elusive concept of self and linear objects is to be questioned here...is the function between two entity´s that turns out to be relevant and not any obscure concept of external or internal...the very object in itself it is the fruit of deeper layers of relation that turn out to be contextually relevant in a specific situation while in other may not...that in turn it is not to say that the status of the object is not valid or true, but simply to say that the set of property´s which are "active" in relation to the observer is contextually dependent from a vast array of other property´s that are negligible or neutral for that specific situation...a function is all about that !

We cannot observe electron orbits inside the atom.