>>13908746You're quite right.
Although you may find that many physicists find it convenient to call particles "anti-particles", it's a bit of a misnomer. Particles don't really have a "direction", so to speak, because they are not objects of a given spatial dimension. They are rather the mathematical entities that describe the configuration of the quantum field that fills space.
The most common example of this is the electron. As the name suggests, it's an elementary particle that has a spin of 1/2, but it also has a charge of -1, and it's a fermion (has a spin of 1/2, but a half-integer charge).
However, there are also particles that are called "anti-particles", and these are not actually the "opposite" of any "particles" (in the sense of being the spatial equivalent of the "opposite" of the spatial equivalent of an elementary particle), they're just the mathematical description of the "opposite" of the configuration of the quantum field.
The electron and positron are the most common examples of anti-particles.
