Let $C_{\ast} : \cdots \to A_{2} \to A_{1} \to A_{0} \to 0$ be a chain complex of finite dimensional vector spaces over a field $K$.
And let $f_{\ast} : C_{\ast} \to C_{\ast}$ and $g_{\ast} : C_{\ast} \to C_{\ast}$ be two chain endomorphisms of $C_{\ast}$ satisfying $\det (f_{n}) \neq 0$ and $\det (g_{n}) \neq 0$ for any $n$.
Assume that the homology group $H_{n}(C_{\ast})$ is zero for all but finitely many $n$. Then, the induced homomorphism $H_{n}(f_{\ast}) : H_{n}(C_{\ast}) \to H_{n}(C_{\ast})$ is zero for all but finitely many $n$, and so the alternating product $\prod_{n}\det (H_{n}(f_{\ast}))^{(-1)^{n}}$ is well-defined (of course, the same holds for $g_{\ast}$).
Moreover, assume that $\det (f_{n}) = \det (g_{n})$ for any $n$.
My question is:
QUESTION
Under the above conditions, does the next equation hold up to sign?
$\prod_{n} \det (H_{n}(f_{\ast}))^{(-1)^{n}} = \prod_{n} \det (H_{n}(g_{\ast}))^{(-1)^{n}}$.
Note that if the chain complex $C_{\ast}$ is bounded above, the statement can be proved as follows:
$\prod_{n} \det (H_{n}(f_{\ast}))^{(-1)^{n}} = \prod_{n} \det (f_{n})^{(-1)^{n}} = \prod_{n} \det (g_{n})^{(-1)^{n}} = \prod_{n} \det (H_{n}(g_{\ast}))^{(-1)^{n}}$
Here, the first and the last equation can be shown by using induction on the length of $C_{\ast}$, snake lemma and the multiplicativity of $\det$ for short exact sequences. The middle equation is the result of the assumption.
The problem is that, in general, $\prod_{n} \det (f_{n})^{(-1)^{n}}$ and $\prod_{n} \det (g_{n})^{(-1)^{n}}$ are not well-defined.
By Sawin's answer
There is a counterexample if one does not admit the difference of sign.
Please give me any advice.
