The Hubble tension persists as one of the most perplexing and intriguing problems in modern astrophysics. However, I believe that the innate ability of humans to discretise continuous physical entities, inevitably places constraints on our fundamental understanding of the Universe. This is known as the famous is-ought gap. In other words, what humans think the Hubble constant ought to be from the discrete galactic distance measurements of the Hubble’s law and what we get from the continuous cosmic microwave background estimate.

Some of the fundamental developments in the early 20th century highlighted the idea of an ‘intrinsic’ uncertainty in the product of fundamental observables. The very idea of a measurement stands at the premise of considering something as discrete. The famous tension of wave-particle duality of light is an epitome of this fallacy.

In an intuitive sense, the fundamental constant e springs up in differential and integral calculus and is fundamental to a Gaussian function, which stands at the heart of random distribution of discrete objects. In contrast, the constant π appears in sinusoidal and continuous entities. The ratio of estimates of the Hubble constant from two different approaches mentioned before is close to 1.10. One can then ask, what if the ratio π/e =1.16 poses a fundamental limit on how close we can get to the reality of the Universe at a large scale? In other words, epistemic humility of recognising this fallacy might be a manifestation of the ontological clarity of what is and what ought to be.