Even though cosmology isn’t a title used normally for these works, I’m using it to convey that these works are scientific theories (by Aristotle’s definition of science) about how the cosmos works.
The Heavens translated by J. L. Stocks
Book I
1 - Anything divisible in 3 dimensions is divisible in all dimensions. 3 things are also what makes ‘all’ a relevant idea, because otherwise 2 things is simply ‘both’.
2 - Up and down are contraries of each other, but there is no movement contrary to circular movement. Since the elements move either up or down, their contrary movements would not be circular. So, circular movement would be the natural movement of some other kind of body.
4 - There are an infinite number of paths along a circle that pass through the same 2 points.
5 - The body that moves in a circle is not infinite but has a limit.
7 - The infinite cannot be acted upon or act on other things. If the lesser takes longer to act on the greater, then the lesser would need infinite time to act on the greatest. The infinite cannot interact with anything either.
9 - Aristotle explains how there can only be one heaven, that is, there is only one world that contains everything. It’s explained in the sense that the world of forms doesn’t exist. The universe is a particular and material thing because it is perceivable.
Every body within the world is perceivable. There is no body outside the world. Because of all this, there is only one world. The world already contains all that there is.
12 - If a thing that exists for infinite time is, it at once exists and does not. If time were not definite, there would be neither a shortest nor longest time. Since it exists for infinite time, we can assume it to be actualized the entire span as destroyed. But also existing. Therefore, it is impossible for something that exists forever to be destructible.
Book II
1 - Heaven is unaffected by mortal discomfort and it is effortless. There is nothing to prevent it from moving according to its own nature. Because of the impossibility of a soul existing painlessly in this condition, it is not a soul that makes the heavens eternal; it is why it must be devoid of all rational satisfaction.
2 - Aristotle says that the heaven is animate, but he just said that it has no soul? Either there is something funny with the translation or it is supposed to be about internally directed movements but not a soul per se, like those of a robot.