Real is a bad choice of words. Think of compressing things. If space is "real" the objects will interact differently than if the universe has no space, and space is a series of sensory illusions.
As of now current theories suggest you can only store a finite amount of information in a defined space with out it collapsing into a singularity thus destroying all the data stored into that space, meaning the maximum amount of information you can store depends on area, and not volume before it is deleted (if black holes do delete things
). This is not true if space does not exist.
This is not the reason I don't know if space is tangible, but if time does not exist then it is hard to move, and that means you may need a static system that mimics how we see the universe, and then discover how our minds are being tricked. I think it is bad for people to say:
"Dang we can't prove it yet, or ever! Hey, lets close our eyes, put our fingers over our ears, and hum really loud until an answer falls out of the sky, and hits us on the head!"
What you say is true, but before you play to win don't you need to know the basic rules of the game?
So how can you test space?