'twas aimed at the OP, as this is the sort of nonsense theoretical question that the CAA have in their papers.
Perhaps a misplaced rant after a few beers at the end of the week
However, this is purely a geometry question, as the parameters would be impossible to create in real life, so it has absolutely nothing to do with flying a plane.
How did the aircraft get to 40,000'? It obviously climbed, which reduces groundspeed.
Why not ask the same question that if an aircraft at 40,000' could match the speed of the international space station, which covers more ground?
Or if I dig a tunnel 500' below the ground, and flew through that at the same speed as the aircraft at 2000'? Who covers more ground then?
These are all very nice questions if you like a maths problem to solve, perhaps something to do on long flights between you and the captain, but nothing to do with flying a plane.