In this paper, we consider a notion of nonmeasurablity with respect to Marczewski and Marczewski-like tree ideals $s_0$ , $m_0$ , $l_0$ , $cl_0$ , $h_0,$ and $ch_0$ . We show that there exists a subset of the Baire space $\omega ^\omega ,$ which is s-, l-, and m-nonmeasurable that forms a dominating m.e.d. family. We investigate a notion of ${\mathbb {T}}$ -Bernstein sets—sets which intersect but do not contain any body of any tree from a given family of trees ${\mathbb {T}}$ . We also obtain a result on ${\mathcal {I}}$ -Luzin sets, namely, we prove that if ${\mathfrak {c}}$ is a regular cardinal, then the algebraic sum (considered on the real line ${\mathbb {R}}$ ) of a generalized Luzin set and a generalized Sierpiński set belongs to $s_0, m_0$ , $l_0,$ and $cl_0$ .

Mauldin [15] proved that there is an analytic set, which cannot be represented by $B\cup X$ for some Borel set B and a subset X of a $\boldsymbol{\Sigma }^0_2$ -null set, answering a question by Johnson [10]. We reprove Mauldin’s answer by a recursion-theoretical method. We also give a characterization of the Borel generated $\sigma $ -ideals having approximation property under the assumption that every real is constructible, answering Mauldin’s question raised in [15].

Hermann Weyl was one of the greatest mathematicians of the 20th century, with contributions to many branches of mathematics and physics. In 1918, he wrote a famous book, “Das Kontinuum”, on the foundations of mathematics. In that book, he described mathematical analysis as a ‘house built on sand’, and tried to ‘replace this shifting foundation with pillars of enduring strength’.

In this paper, we reexamine and explain the philosophical and mathematical ideas that underly Weyl’s system in “Das Kontinuum”, and show that they are still useful and relevant. We propose a precise formalization of that system, which is the first to be completely faithful to what is written in the book. Finally, we suggest that a certain set-theoretical modern system reflects better Weyl’s ideas than previous attempts (most notably by Feferman) of achieving this goal.

A cornerstone of modern mathematical logic is the diagonal lemma of Gödel and Carnap. It is used in, for example, the classical proofs of the theorems of Gödel, Rosser, and Tarski. From its first explication in 1934, just essentially one proof has appeared for the diagonal lemma in the literature; a proof that is so tricky and hard to relate that many authors have tried to avoid the lemma altogether. As a result, some so-called diagonal-free proofs have been given for the above-mentioned fundamental theorems of logic. In this paper, we provide new proofs for the semantic formulation of the diagonal lemma, and for a weak version of the syntactic formulation of it.