Are there limits to human/devices perception? As far as i know, measurement devices present measurements based on something that affects the device's particles, for instance, forces, heat, tension, voltage...
My question is, given that every change of position of any particle may affect the particles of the measurement device, why cant we design devices that can distinguish between any state of the universe?
Consider for instance our human body. If i have a car behind a Wall, i cannot distinguish this situation from one where there isn't a car behind the Wall, since i only see the Wall. Still, having a car behind the Wall surely affects something in our particles, maybe the gravity pull from the car, or some change in the overall environment light, or even a change in the trajectory of the light that arrives in our eyes (since we perceive light), even if the effect is minimal.
Is there some law that limits measument and devices so that we cannot have a device that can distinguish from every state of the universe?
 A: Let's review some general answers to your question trying to get some insight on the problem rather than completely answering it - the answer being: yes, there are limits!
[The answer is virtually math-free]
First of all, the device (or the human mind) being composed of particles, it is part of the universe and interferes with it, so, even if your device existed, you will never be one-hundred percent sure whether it's measuring the phaenomenon you are interested in or whether it is affected by its own existence. Consider a volt-meter to measure properties of electrical circuits: what you have to do is to "deviate" some of the current from your circuit into the instrument, effectively modifying the circuit's behavior. You can of course model the situation and estimate the disturbance you are giving to your system to make sure your measurement is not changing significantly the behavior of what you are measuring. But there always is some interference and you have to live with it.
This is dramatically more relevant in quantum mechanics, as measuring something means deleting almost any information about the state it was in before. If the device is a human, you might go as far as saying that nothing exists outside and that consciousness is inventing an outside world.
This might feel like a philosophycal issue but it is an issue we need to take into account.
There is a modelling limit: you might guess there is something behind the wall, you might guess it has an effect on some particles around you but until you have a model to describe it, you can not make the measurement. Think of dark matter: we guess it's there because it has a gravitational effect on space objects but we don't know enough about it to measure it directly. There might also be other unknown objects which do not interfere with anything we know of (maybe they do not interfere with mass, with particles, with electrical fields..): how do measure them? But ok, this might be fringe science. Another problem is that some phaenomena take place at high energy / temperature / etc and to measure them we might need more energy than it's actually available. That's why CERN tries to make its instruments more and more powerful: to have access to scales we don't have access to now. But, you might argue, there might be technological advancement solving this soon. However, still, if the measurement you want to do requires half the energy in the universe, well, it might be doable in principle but not practically. What if you want to measure the inside of a black hole? How do you get there?
There are a lot of limits on the amount of energy, matter, information etc. that one can observe, record, delete, etc. They are huge so we are far from them at the moment, but they exist.
Then there are of course technical limits:

*

*there is a resolution issue. Some phaenomena are so small, you need to amplify their effect on measurable objects. One standard example is gravitational waves: they have such a tiny effect on matter, than in order to detect it you need to build huge (kilometers) big devices. Or think of CERN.

*there is a precision issue: is your apparatus built with such precision that it can measure what you want? You can not use a ruler to measure an atom. Can you rule out consistent error due to something be slightly off in your device?  Instruments need to be calibrated, as you do to a scale when you set the tare.
So while it might be in principle possible to tune the precision as much as we want, it will never be infinitely precise. Each measurement has a measurement error.
However you might say, I don't care about the error: I just want my measurement to be doable!

Finally, the theoretical limit. As far as I can think of, the uncertainty principle. Very briefly, it states that some couples of observables (famously, velocity and position) can not be measured with infinite precision together. Let's call $\Delta x$ the error you do when measuring measurement $x$ and $\Delta p$ the error you do on $p$ (whatever $x$ and $p$ are). Then
$$\Delta x \Delta p > \hbar/2$$
meaning that if your $\Delta x$ is small (very precise measurement of $x$) then $\Delta p$ is going to be bigger than $\hbar/2\Delta x$ so it will be as big as $\Delta x$ is small. Now, this limit can not be overcome as far as we know. It is in principle a limit only on the error you do, you can measure both things but not with infinite precision.
If the measurement you need to do requires a given precision $\Delta x$ on $x$ and a given precision $\Delta p$ on $p$ (say you need to know a particle's position $x$ with a given precision and also its speed with a given precision in order to know whether there is a car behind a wall) and if the minimum error you are allowed on $p$ is higher than $\hbar/2\Delta x$ then that measurement can not be done. So there are some things that we cannot know with infinite precision and this limit is not philosophycal nor technological. Additionally, in quantum mechanics, you can not measure the state before your measurement, so there could be undetectable states that were there and disappeared once you measure.
There is one loophole only: that if you can not measure something, not even model it, that means that what you are trying to measure has no effect whatsoever on the physical world and thus it is as if it is not there at all. Whether something can have a reality even if it is not measurable in principle depends on your philosophycal view and is a question outside the field of physics (say, can you measure God?).
