Given a pair of entangled atoms, it's my understanding that the next measurements taken on each will correlate. If, after taking its measurement, before the other is measured, one of the pair is destroyed, it is my understanding that the remaining's initial measurement will be unaffected, as in still correlate to the deceased's original measurement. (If this were not the case then it would be easy to devise a scheme for "instantaneous" data transfers across any distance.) Therefore, it would seem there is no connection or entanglement or "spooky interaction" between these atoms. Rather they have only been configured or seeded to produce correlating results when next measured. So wouldn't atomic synchronization be a more accurate term than entanglement?