Background: As sort of a hobby, Ernst Witt gave extremely short proofs for famous theorems. This question is about his six-line proof of the Gelfand-Mazur Theorem ("The only $\Bbb C$-Banach algebra $K$ which is a skew field is $\Bbb C$ itself") resp. its historic predecessor and now corollary, Ostrowski's Theorem ("The only complete Archimedean fields are $\Bbb R$ and $\Bbb C$"; not to be confused with the more famous Ostrowski's theorem which classifies valuations on $\Bbb Q$). Witt's article is "Über einen Satz von Ostrowski", Arch. Math. 3 (1952), p. 334, reprinted on p. 404 of his Collected Papers. Unfortunately, I do not have access to either source right now. The best free online source I could find is this (H.-D. Ebbinghaus, Numbers, p. 245) English translation of its decisive three sentences.
I understand the first sentence, which says that w.l.o.g. we can assume $\dim_{\Bbb R}K>2$ and hence $K^\times$ simply connected. I also understand the third sentence which says that there cannot be an isomorphism between the additive group of $K$ and the multiplicative group $K^\times$ (obviously, as we are in characteristic $0$; there is a typo in the translation, since of course it's the element $-1$ which is of order 2 in $K^\times$, and IIRC that's what Witt writes in the original). But the second sentence
Note 4: Witt's paper has four references, two of which are Ostrowski's and Mazur's papers with the repectiverespective theorems, the two others are
E. Hille, Functional Analysis and Semi-Groups (Amer. Math. Soc. Coll. Publ. XXXI). New York 1948, pp. 474–475, andHe also refers to
E. R. Lorch, The theory of analytic functions in normal abelian vector rings. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 54, pp. 414–425 (1943). (Thanksthanks Daniele Tampieri for the link.)
I suspect they would contain some hint or useful background information; I do not have access tobut only by saying that it presents a different proof via imitating complex function theory over $K(i)$ (as the first sourcefunction $f(z) = (z-a)^{-1}$ for $a \in K \setminus \Bbb C$ would be a bounded entire function and thus contradict Liouville's theorem). The second oneIncidentally, Lorch's paper quotes Mazur for the theorem (Thms 3/4 p. 417) but also does define the logarithm as a path integral starting from the unit element (p. 422).
The last remaining reference is
E. Hille, Functional Analysis and Semi-Groups (Amer. Math. Soc. Coll. Publ. XXXI). New York 1948, pp. 474–475
I suspect this double page would contain some hint or useful background information; annoyingly, this free online copy of Hille stops at page 265, and all other copies I have found are later editions with significantly changed chapters. Can someone find these two pages of Hille's original book?