Finding the root of consciousness [?]

Hammeroff isn't a physicalist.

? It seems to me that his (and Roger Penrose's) neural microtubule quantum mechanical theory, though not material in the sense of nuts and bolts, is still basically all about things (of a sort) not thoughts, and still runs afoul of the Hard Problem. In any case, I didn't mean to single out Hammeroff. What I meant to refer to was the entire group of various physicalist neural mechanism theories of mind.

So when brain changes result in changes to a personality that is a distortion of a signal? But then were is the "you" that had the original personality?

So the problem is, what about the both superficial and profound personality changes that can occur due to brain damage of various kinds? For that matter, personality can be easily changed just by ingestion of alcohol. This seems to imply that the personality is generated by the brain. Against that, many investigated NDE cases strongly imply that who you are is an immaterial invulnerable spirit. This is also strongly implied by a lot of other paranormal empirical data such as reincarnation cases and mediumistic communications. And there's the Hard Problem. How to reconcile two apparently contradictory bodies of evidence?

There is no definitive answer, but one conceptual approach comes to mind: there could be an inherent "soul personality" that may be relatively undistortedly manifested in the person when there are no extremely adverse conditions such as brain damage, serious genetic defects, childhood abuse and exteme poverty. Conversely, the "soul personality" may be severely distorted when such adverse conditions do happen. At death, the human personality experience progressively opens up to realize its true nature as a soul. NDEs are just the very beginning of this process, truncated by return to the body. In this process at physical death the personality never quite loses it's sense that "I am me". But also, the distortions created by the previous physical life are relegated to the soul memory of that last earth life. So, the bottom line is, with this conceptual structure the unique human personality when considered as a whole is unfortunately just temporary to the physical life. There would be no absolutely human personal afterlife in that sense. That also actually might be a relief in one way, because it would mean there would be for example no paranoid schizophrenic spirits wandering around in the afterlife.

Mediumistic communications seemingly coming from the deceased personality would then mainly be either from the still surviving not yet merged and opened up human personality, or from the soul assuming the guise of the departed personality in order to help and reassure the grieving loved one.

It seems to me that his (and Roger Penrose's) neural microtubule quantum mechanical theory, though not material in the sense of nuts and bolts, is still basically all about things (of a sort) not thoughts, and still runs afoul of the Hard Problem. In any case, I didn't mean to single out Hammeroff. What I meant to refer to was the entire group of various physicalist neural mechanism theories of mind.

But all theories of consciousness are going to have to have some neural mechanisms involved, regardless of whether neurons are icons in a simulation of sorts, filter/transmitters for a soul, or the right structures for getting consciousness from panpsychism, or something else...

There is no definitive answer, but one conceptual approach comes to mind: there could be an inherent "soul personality" that may be relatively undistortedly manifested in the person when there are no extremely adverse conditions such as brain damage, serious genetic defects, childhood abuse and exteme poverty. Conversely, the "soul personality" may be severely distorted when such adverse conditions do happen. At death, the human personality experience progressively opens up to realize its true nature as a soul. NDEs are just the very beginning of this process, truncated by return to the body. In this process at physical death the personality never quite loses it's sense that "I am me". But also, the distortions created by the previous physical life are relegated to the soul memory of that last earth life. So, the bottom line is, with this conceptual structure the unique human personality when considered as a whole is unfortunately just temporary to the physical life. There would be no absolutely human personal afterlife in that sense. That also actually might be a relief in one way, because it would mean there would be for example no paranoid schizophrenic spirits wandering around in the afterlife.

Mediumistic communications seemingly coming from the deceased personality would then mainly be either from the still surviving not yet merged and opened up human personality, or from the soul assuming the guise of the departed personality in order to help and reassure the grieving loved one.

This seems to suggest something different than the brain being akin to a TV receiving a signal though? It seems more like what Irreducible Mind suggests, that soul & body are in some way akin to a salt & water solution.

But all theories of consciousness are going to have to have some neural mechanisms involved, regardless of whether neurons are icons in a simulation of sorts, filter/transmitters for a soul, or the right structures for getting consciousness from panpsychism, or something else...

But the materialist neuroscience mind/brain theories assume that the actual substance and workings of the neurons and neuron interactions are somehow the essence, the very substance, of consciousness, a notion that runs right into the Hard Problem. Whereas interactive dualistic theories of the mind/brain relationship envision the physical brain as the receiver/transmitter or filter of immaterial consciousness, where the two orders of existence are of existentially entirely different "substances" that nevertheless are contrived to interact in certain intended ways. This interaction necessarily involves transduction and processing by specific neurological structures very very roughly equivalent to the electronic components and modules of the TV set, which transduce and process the electromagnetic signal to produce the picture and sound.  

This seems to suggest something different than the brain being akin to a TV receiving a signal though? It seems more like what Irreducible Mind suggests, that soul & body are in some way akin to a salt & water solution.

The TV set or receiver/transmitter analogies are merely very rough and inaccurate metaphors. Of course the electromagnetic waves are really material in a sense, unlike consciousness. And the interaction of the soul with the personality characteristics developed during life by the physical brain/body is of course too extremely intricate to be exactly captured by the simplistic metaphor. However I think it captures the basic phenomenon, where the original "signal" is the soul or spirit consciousness/personality manifested in the physical world by the brain, which over the lifetime is modified and supplemented and also adversely distorted by a myriad of experiences and physical brain alterations and damages. At death this greatly modified personality goes through a process of expansion into soul consciousness that necessarily involves relegating much of the physical personality accruals into soul memory. The newly ended physical personality is not wiped out, but is relegated to merely supplementing the vastly greater soul personality. Or so goes this particular model.

Whereas interactive dualistic theories of the mind/brain relationship envision the physical brain as the receiver/transmitter or filter of immaterial consciousness, where the two orders of existence are of existentially entirely different "substances" that nevertheless are contrived to interact in certain intended ways. This interaction necessarily involves transduction and processing by specific neurological structures very very roughly equivalent to the electronic components and modules of the TV set, which transduce and process the electromagnetic signal to produce the picture and sound.  

The TV set or receiver/transmitter analogies are merely very rough and inaccurate metaphors

While sympathetic with most of your points, I think it important to stay solid with the idea of two (or more) separate "substances" and not mix the metaphors.  Transduction is a physics observation regarding equipment where energy changes state, such as electronic signal to sound waves.  The units of measurement never touch the meaning of the signal.

However, energy can be spent to arrange (encode, sequence, organize) physical circumstances to create a logical structure where information gain (and reduction in entropy) generate functional outcomes.  In this thermodynamic view, we can see the physical aspects of signal processing AND gain insight into immaterial structure in infospace, measured as outcomes of functional advantages for communication and productivity.  There exist units of measure for these immaterial kinds of substances and science can quantify the activity.