Basically that is what the 1915 GR equation says. Think of the LHS as curvature expressed in units of inverse area (units could be 1/meter
2), and the RHS talking about energy density (units could be joules per cubic meter, energy per unit volume). So as one increases the other must increase because LHS = RHS.
But why is curvature expressed as 1/area ? think about different size spheres. A little sphere is strongly curved and has a small area. Big spheres are only slightly curved and have a large surface area. So its INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL. little area ⇔ big curvature
big area ⇔ tiny amount of curvature
so curvature ≈ 1/area
So what kind of PROPORTIONALITY CONSTANT is there between 1/area and energy/volume ?
That is something you might think about overnight or sometime when you have free time to just think.
A hint: the metric unit of energy joule = force unit x distance unit
One form of energy is WORK, the work of pushing with unit force for a unit of distance.
energy density = (force x distance)/distance
3 = force/distance
2
= force x 1/area
So if you multiply a curvature by a force you get an energy density. And Einstein discovered that energy density DIVIDED BY a certain force gives you
the curvature that the force causes.
If you keep on asking questions, I or somebody else here will probably tell you what that force is that is the constant of proportionality between the LHS and RHS of the Einstein GR equation.
Also be warned that the Einstein GR equation might be just slightly wrong at extremely high density. People are working on that. When they "quantize" the classic 1915 GR equation some people have found that a "quantum correction term" appears which only has a significant effect at very very very high density. So something else besides the formation of a "singularity" might happen when a star collapses. These people talk about it in this recent research paper
http://arxiv.org/abs/1401.6562 just click on PDF, it's free.
But Einstein GR equation in original NOT quantized form is very nearly perfect and the possible error in the proportionality between density and curvature only comes in at extreme density. For almost all cases it is amazingly accurate.
Also I have oversimplified by narrowing the discussion down to just energy density and a simplified form of curvature. I wanted to get across the spirit of the equation without to much extra detail.